/ATG/ - Anti-Tech General #2 - [Former /TKG/] - Let's do this Edition

>Fuck space
What should Humans do instead according to brainlet luddites like you?
Farm potatoes and do nothing? Typical 3rd worlder attitude.

>it won't be you going up there user
You dont have to go up there to profit from it.
>How has that been going so far?
Very good actually, Life is top comfy nowadays.
All the knowledge of the world right at your fingertips whenever you need it thanks to technology.

>Is there a way we can properly utilize technology without it destroying us and our society?
Yes there is.
I believe that the answers to your questions reside within the rabbit hole of pic rel.
Be careful.
You will find that even the rabbit holes have rabbit holes. You will encounter digital traps before you ever find the end of the maze. But you will learn much.
Pay extra attention to the coincidences (synchronicities) which have been occurring over the past few days.
o7
And
Bump

Attached: 20200412_112833.jpg (720x1230, 422.12K)

>What should Humans do instead according to brainlet luddites like you?

recover and retain freedom, for one. Not conforming themselves to a pathetic illusion of freedom and conquest of space.

>Life is top comfy nowadays.

Ever wonder why unarmed invasions (mass immigration) is even actually possible...? Well, here you have it. Comfy people leading comfy lives thinking 'all is good, this won't affect me or my tendies'.

>Typical 3rd worlder attitude.

Ackshually, user, the absolute hallmark of third-world Weltanschauung is being comfy. Yu europeans have gone in that direction, so has the US.

>All the knowledge of the world right at your fingertips whenever you need it thanks to technology.

Lol at confusing information availability and rapid delivery thereof with knowledge.

Attached: Ted quotes meme6drugs.jpg (866x520, 143.15K)

One bump coming right up!

Yeah, well, check THIS out for more strangeness, user:

Almost all humans sub-consciously perceive in their every-day lives only the most salient aspects of technology, and even then, the most 'positive' aspects: i.e. indoor plumbing, heating, anesthetics, medical technique in general, etc. The all too human psychological bias towards perceiving as more salient that which benefits us in the short-term vs. that which harms us in the long term is well known.

As Ted himself has observed in ISAIF, virtually all technical developments ON THEIR OWN can be construed as beneficial. However, it is the semi-autonomous complex of inextricably inter-related techniques and technologies (with all of their forseeable and unforseeable consequences) that put long-term human existence at grave risk. We posit -as does Ted- that in this context we are slaves to technology. And as everyone knows, the most comfortable and well-fed slave is also the most subdued and obedient slave.

High-organization and efficient logistics are the same everywhere, no matter what the incidental ideological/propagandistic context may happen to be. In all cases, ideology and its propaganda will soon enough effect any necessary changes to the ideological infrastructure in order to accomodate the needs of technological progress as may be eventually required by the technological system.

Technological progress abides by its own intrinsic laws of reason and logic in a self-directed and goal-oriented manner. These 'hard-wired' characteristics of technological civilization are what leads us to state that ideology is in all cases subsidiary to the requirements of technological expansion and efficiency, and not the other way around.

Attached: Ted quotes meme3govt genetics.jpg (866x520, 153.54K)

>recover and retain freedom
Humans were never free and never will be. we are herd animals and we need structure and rules to maintain order and growth.
>Ever wonder why unarmed invasions (mass immigration) is even actually possible...?
eventually technology will solve the problems these people bring in.
>the absolute hallmark of third-world Weltanschauung is being comfy.
there is a difference between 1stz world comfyness and just being dumb, lazy and a burden to the world.
>Lol at confusing information availability and rapid delivery thereof with knowledge.
Its up to the individual how they gonna use this gift from the gods.

>we need structure and rules to maintain order and growth.

Absolutely, agreed.

>eventually technology will solve the problems these people bring in.

You have GOT to be kidding. Everyone copes, no doubt, cannot throw the first stone here, but wheeeeew lad.....

>there is a difference between 1stz world comfyness and just being dumb, lazy and a burden to the world.

Say that in 10 - 15 years when your culture -what remains of it- is fully diluted by the mass importation of literal welfare-seeking trash. Rest assured, technology WILL fix that problem, no doubt: a complete and deep revamping of your political and judicial technique will see to that. Get ready to support laziness with the fruits of your work.

>Its up to the individual how they gonna use this gift from the gods.

And THAT is exactly is why the whole 'muh knowledge at muh fingertips' thing is bullshit. You basically answered your own question here, user.

Good to be back with all of you!

Improvements on the preplist since the last thread:
>Nutrition - Primitive method of filtering water of dirt added
>Settlement - Minor improvements on "House" section
>Combat and Self-Defense - New sections: "Shields" and "Traps"
>Medicine - Minor improvements on "How to Heal" and "Tips and Tricks" sections
>Foraging - A whole bunch of info throughout the entire chapter
> New chapter: "Skills"

Attached: 1586119734713.jpg (749x827, 82.33K)

Why would I want to go to space when almost all of it is a desert, and if there are life-sustaining planets, it may not mean they are able to sustain human being. Isn't this planet we already live in enough? The key to hapiness is not to have more, but to need less.

Aún no me he parado a pensar calmadamente, en detalle y de forma ordenada acerca de su último libro, pero, hablando en general, no me gusta mucho. No me malinterprete usted, coincido con la mayoría de lo que Kaczynski intenta expresar en ese libro y comparto los valores, ideas y fines principales con él, pero hay algo que hace que ese libro en particular no me guste.

No sé, quizá sea el hecho de que pretende ser una herramienta práctica pero en realidad o principalmente no es un libro escrito desde el conocimiento o la experiencia directos de las prácticas, sino que principalmente se basa en el estudio de la teoría acerca de las prácticas, que no es lo mismo. Kaczynski ha leído mucho acerca de la práctica “política”[5] (uso el término “política” meramente con el sentido de aquello que está orientado a conseguir realizar cambios en una sociedad), quizá haya observado muchas de las prácticas de algunos grupos “políticos” desde fuera, pero, por lo que yo sé, prácticamente no ha sido miembro activo de ningún movimiento “político” (al menos hasta la fecha). No sabe mucho de los detalles del funcionamiento interno de los movimientos; no ha trabajado mucho con otros miembros dentro de grupos; etc. Casi todo su conocimiento e información acerca de este asunto procede de fuentes indirectas (lecturas de los escritos de revolucionarios y activistas, o estudios sociológicos, encuestas, sondeos, estadísticas, etc.). Yo fui miembro activo de algunos grupos “políticos” en mi juventud, y conozco de primera mano cómo actúa, se comporta, piensa, etc. la gente que pertenece a movimientos de ese tipo. Y cuando hay una discrepancia entre la experiencia práctica y la teoría acerca de la práctica, yo confío más en mi propia experiencia que en las lecturas acerca de la práctica “política” y la organización.

Refer to the questions 7 and 14 of the FAQ
pastebin.com/CiTT61vW

Puede que sea, también, el hecho de que el libro está lleno de reglas y declaraciones que, por un lado, pretenden ser claras, categóricas, definidas, de aplicación general, etc. pero, por otro, demasiado a menudo acaban siendo demasiado vagas, cargadas de excepciones y matizaciones y, en el mejor de los casos, dependiendo de la interpretación del “sentido común”. En ese libro Kaczynski ha tratado (equivocadamente, en mi opinión) de dejar a un lado la intuición y de desarrollar las ideas sólo o principalmente de forma lógica, empírica y metódica y, sin embargo, al final, demasiado a menudo acaba dependiendo del “sentido común” (que es lo mismo que, o muy similar a, la intuición) para diferenciar entre los distintos casos y saber cuándo y cómo aplicarlos. Nosotros, los españoles, solemos decir: “Para este viaje no hacían falta tantas alforjas”, es decir, uno no necesita tratar de ser o parecer tan metódico y lógico si al final es la intuición lo que determina qué ha de hacerse o decidirse). Y, por supuesto, además, esta vaguedad tiene otros efectos negativos: atrae a gente irracional o débil; facilita que las ideas, fines, y valores se perviertan; etc.

Quizá sea que a veces resulta tedioso y uno saca la impresión de que muchas partes son superfluas (como por ejemplo, toda esa especulación acerca del rey-filósofo[6]).

>Absolutely, agreed.
and the best way to maintain order and support growth is through Technology.

>You have GOT to be kidding.
I'm not kidding, technology solves literally all these problems.
>removes the need for mass emigration because everything is automated with machines
would be one example
>Get ready to support laziness with the fruits of your work.
in the Future we all receive UBI anyway.

>And THAT is exactly is why the whole 'muh knowledge at muh fingertips' thing is bullshit.
Its not bullshit tho, like you could waste your lifetime whining about technology being bad or you could educate yourself and make shitloads of money.

Y también en realidad discrepo con, o pongo en cuestión, algunas otras cosas más concretas:

· Tras años de pruebas y errores, onions ya muy escéptico acerca de la posibilidad de encontrar suficiente gente con la suficiente calidad para crear un movimiento “antitecnológico” (no me gusta este término para denominarlo, pero dado que Kaczynski lo denomina así, usaré aquí dicho término) eficaz que tenga una oportunidad de éxito a la hora de eliminar el sistema tecnoindustrial. Crear dicho movimiento es necesario y es técnicamente o teóricamente posible, pero, ¿es realmente posible en la práctica? Si no existe suficiente gente capaz y comprometida, todo lo demás es imposible. Deberíamos intentarlo, pero… ya veremos… o quizá no.

· En cierto momento casi al final del libro, Kaczynski escribe acerca de la superioridad militar de los europeos sobre otras sociedades no europeas, y dice que fue debida a ciertos factores misteriosos que habían ido siendo seleccionados en las sociedades europeas a través de su historia. Bueno, yo no estoy de acuerdo con él. No sólo en lo que atañe a esta explicación en particular (la superioridad militar europea era debida principalmente a una tecnología superior, tanto en lo militar como en general, combinada con nuestra mayor resistencia a ciertas enfermedades infecciosas –de las cuales además actuamos como vectores de transmisión-), sino también en lo que respecta al modo de pensar que representa: idealismo, es decir, antimaterialismo; incluso irracionalismo (algo similar al pensamiento mágico: “hay algunos factores etéreos que nadie conoce cuáles son, y que nadie puede siquiera llegar a conocer” es lo que está diciendo realmente. Suena a “fuerzas mágicas”, “energías misteriosas” o alguna mierda por el estilo). Esto es completamente discordante respecto al modo de pensar racional, científico y materialista que Kaczynski suele mostrar.

>Humans were never free and never will be. we are herd animals and we need structure and rules to maintain order and growth.
The difference here is of quality. Man is a social animal, but he is an animal that must live in small groups, in which everybody knows everybody else intimitly. Not as a small cog in an organization which seems to be the only possible way man can live nowadats.
>eventually technology will solve the problems these people bring in.
This is more a confession of faith.
Also why space? What's the point? Why space traveling has become a end in itself? What's there? Mars? fucking rock.
How do you profit of space colonization tell me

· También onions escéptico acerca de la utilidad real del estudio de casos históricos de movimientos y revoluciones. No estoy diciendo que sea completamente inútil, pero quizá no sea siempre tan útil como Kaczynski piensa. Lo que queremos hacer es completamente diferente de las revoluciones del pasado. Nuestra meta y nuestros valores son (y deben ser) diferentes de los de los revolucionarios del pasado. Quizá podamos aprender algunas cosas útiles estudiando los métodos, la organización y las estrategias del bolchevismo, de los revolucionarios franceses, de Alinsky, etc., pero no sé lo útiles que serán (ni para qué) y por tanto dudo de si merece la pena estudiarlos. Si uno quiere aprender a comer filetes, no debería observar a aquellos que comen sopa, porque lo que necesita es aprender a usar un tenedor y un cuchillo, no una cuchara.

· Demasiadas citas y referencias de las que aparecen en el libro son inútiles y superfluas. Parece como si para ser un autor intelectualmente respetable uno tuviese que citar o referirse con frecuencia a otros autores o personajes famosos. Sin embargo, esto no es más que un vicio esnob.

Entre otras cosas que probablemente ahora no recuerdo o no onions consciente de ellas.

Bueno, o quizá sea sólo cosa mía. Puede ser que yo no capte ni entienda adecuadamente el supuesto valor de ese libro debido a mis propias limitaciones y defectos. No onions idiota, pero puede ser que no sea lo suficientemente inteligente (o que no lo sea de la forma necesaria) para entender el libro completamente. No lo creo, pero podría ser… O quizá simplemente sea que siempre he odiado las lecturas históricas, sociológicas y similares… O que desprecio profundamente a muchos de los autores que a Kaczynski le gusta tanto citar, así como muchos de los modos que tienen de expresar sus ideas (normalmente son vagos, ambiguos y falsamente radicales, tajantes y fuertes).

>The difference here is of quality
yes and Technology raises that quality to extreme never before seen heights.
>Man is a social animal
yes
>but he is an animal that must live in small groups
says who? If humans MUST live in small groups they would do so, they dont.
>Not as a small cog in an organization
get a better job then, Technology opens up so many opportunities there is a hundreds different way to live your life.
>This is more a confession of faith.
Its a matter of fact and observing developments in the field.
>Also why space?
resources, research, manufacturing
>What's the point?
Increase quality of Life for everyone
>Mars? fucking rock.
technology will eventually fix this

>How do you profit of space colonization
easy, you margin long the companies that pull it off.

also how come its only 3rd worlders and poor country flags whining about technology ITT?

>the best way to maintain order and support growth is through Technology
At what point does order become slavery? The modern tech-system is inescapable. Self-sufficency has been made unachievable. That's slavery.

>technology solves literally all these problems
Regarding mass immigration, technology causes it, in every single way. It is through technology and because of technology that rapefugees go to Europe in enormous numbers. Think about it: how cpuld millions of 3rd worlders go to Europe without modern ships and airplanes? And why would they go to Europe if it wasn't for it's technological development and comfy lifestyle?

>in the Future we all receive UBI anyway
From who?

>you could waste your lifetime whining about technology being bad or you could educate yourself and make shitloads of money
Between freedom from the modern technological slavery and money, I'd choose the former without hesitation.

Usted dice que ya ha participado en movimientos sociales y que por eso gran parte del trabajo de Ted se le hace sentido comun
Usted podria estar cayendo en el sesgo cognitivo llamado "La maldicion del conocimiento".
Pero mucho de lo que usted dice es cierto. No sirve de mucho estudiar las táctica de guerra de la edad media para entender tácticas de guerra en la era de la cibernetica.
Ted dice que el libro no debe aplicarse como si fuera un libro de ingeniería, osea de forma totalmente mecánica. Debe aplicarse de manera creativa. Esto se debe a que los sistemas sociales son muy complejos, lo mismo se podría decir de libros de economía por ejemplo. Los sistemas sociales, a diferencia de sistemas no-sociales, reaccionan a las predicciones que se hace de ello. Este es un ejemplo de por que no se puede aplicar esas tecnicas de manera mecanica, a diferencia de un sistema computacional digamos.
Sobre las personas, Ted dice que no es necesario tener a la mayoria, solo a un pequeño grupo de gente inteligente y que sea fiel al movimiento. Da el ejemplo de la revolucion cubana y rusa, no se necesito de la mayoria de la poblacion para llevarla a cabo, solo de un grupo de personas que estuvieran totalmente comprometidas con los ideales del movimiento.

>anti-teach thread
>argentinian

Why you and your people are like this?

>and the best way to maintain order and support growth is through Technology.

So, '1984' style, or 'Brave New World' style? Which would you prefer, user?

> technology solves literally all these problems.

No mate, technology has prepared the ground for these problems to arise in th first place. Enjoy your brown grand-children.

>in the Future we all receive UBI anyway.

No, in the future YOU work in the belly of the machine, while the imported others recieve the lion's share of UBI. Sure, you and all other ethnic Germans will get just enough to cover propaganda purposes, but don't forget it mate, it will be the ethnic Germans supporting the 'New Germans', NOT the other way around.

>removes the need for mass emigration because everything is automated with machines

....Thoght about it and thought about it, but still don't even know where to begin replying to this point....

>Its not bullshit tho, like you could waste your lifetime whining about technology being bad or you could educate yourself and make shitloads of money.

Again with the individualism. Where will your community/society be when a willing and competitive minority make themselves rich and the vast majority is literal sub-IQ comfy tech-obsessed dolts...?

>66600
>666 times a hundred
Goddammit all to hell why did i never learn to speak spanish

Attached: 1585826227995.jpg (1024x768, 172K)

how do I get electronic copies of Elule's work?

If you read ted kaczynski piece of shit manifesto and actually buy it you're way too much of an impressionable retarded dumbass

>At what point does order become slavery?
its always slavery if you are not at the top of the pyramid, has nothing to do with technology tho.
>Self-sufficency has been made unachievable
not true
>It is through technology and because of technology that rapefugees go to Europe in enormous numbers.
no they come here because of economics and because the crisis was artificially created to game the markets. its the lack of certain technologies and safeguard system that allow this exploitation.
>how could millions of 3rd worlders go to Europe without modern ships and airplanes?
most of these rapefugee niggers actually travel on foot
>And why would they go to Europe if it wasn't for it's technological development and comfy lifestyle?
cant really blame them for that, everyone wants to move up in the pyramid and nobody not even the dumbest nigger wants to be at the bottom.
>From who?
in the not so distant future everything that is automated will be paying taxes automatically and every human will be taxed individually in real time. once every human is chipped the system can allocate and manage resources much more efficiently.
>I'd choose the former without hesitation
then you would be a potato farmer for the King who threatens to cut off your limbs if you dont deliver enough potatoes.

>says who?
Your nature, the destruction of the extended family is one of the reason why we have become coomsumers. In fact there seems to be a corelation between it and suicide. (Korea for example). Curiously Jacques Ellul is famous in Korea.
See for example dunbars number. The research of dunbar started because an entrepeneur noticed that people in small groups work better and more efficient.
That's your explanation of why we should conquer space? Is a declaration of faith. First of you are assuming that fixing mars is technicable fissable, with no proofs about it. How is the colonization of mars going to increase the quality of life for everyone?

>how do I get electronic copies of Elule's work?

Good question. Don't know. Only have hard copies. His name is Jacques ELLUL, in any case.

Maybe some other user can provide the answer to this question.

Attached: Ellul on technique-protodefinition of technique.jpg (1334x344, 278.08K)

>Which would you prefer, user?
It doesnt matter what I prefer, I will thrive in any system they set up.
>Enjoy your brown grand-children.
Artificial Wombs and genetic editing solve this problem.
checkmate.
>while the imported others recieve the lion's share of UBI.
nope, the game plan is to get everyone chipped, once you are chipped you get your UBI, simple as.
>Where will your community/society be when a willing and competitive minority make themselves rich and the vast majority is literal sub-IQ comfy tech-obsessed dolts...?
there will always be people like you at the bottom of the pyramid.
I chose to be the rich minority.

If you want to learn a language, I recommend Michel Thomas Method and well, simulation haha (videogames in spanish). You know to practice. I was able to learn french with that method, and was almost able to learn german. Just saying I have never found a better method to learn european languages, at least if you dont have the money to travel.

>people in small groups work better and more efficient.
depends on the work doesnt it?

>That's your explanation of why we should conquer space?
research, resources and manufacturing are good reasons to go to space
>you are assuming that fixing mars is technicable fissable
maybe now it isnt, eventually we get there tho.
>How is the colonization of mars going to increase the quality of life for everyone?
through trade

In the future we will have to use technology to not go extinct. Tech isn't the problem. Its (((them))) and their propaganda all over the world. Im not saying technology is flawless and without major caveats, but to flat out reject it is self destructive and foolish.

>Technology raises that quality to extreme never before seen heights
Says that to social neetworks users who have hundreds of friends on their accounts, and know almost none of them intimately.

>If humans MUST live in small groups they would do so, they dont
Except we do. All of us, not matter how socially active and extravert, have a generally small circle of friends and family members we hang out with oftenly and know intimately. Those who live in crowded settlements do so mostly because they have to.

>get a better job then, Technology opens up so many opportunities there is a hundreds different way to live your life
Your education, current financial situation and the country you live in, among other factors, have a large influences on the jobs you can or can't get. And without the tech-system, you wouldn't need a job. You could live in the woods as a hunter-gatherer.

>Increase quality of Life for everyone
Debatable. On one hand, yeah, we have computers, Internet, electric stoves and other very convenient tech equipment. On the other hand, the amounts of depression, unfulfilment and even suicide were never as high as they are now. And also, unless an economically egalitarian system (like communism) was in practice, the wuality of life wouldn't be improved for everyone.

>technology will eventually fix this
What is there to fix? If Mars was supposed to be inhabitable, it would've been from the start. Not to mentions that there are a LOT of things to be done in order for Mars to be anything even remotely close to inhabitable. The amounts of radiation, heat, water, vegetation etc.

>also how come its only 3rd worlders and poor country flags whining about technology ITT?
Nor sure for TT, but in the previous threads, there have been actively anti-tech anons from Germany and Finland.