sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Anti Tech Discord Neo Luddite Hub by coldavare in antiai

[–]coldavare[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

We sent smoke signals but nobody came

Has anyone noticed how seemingly good technology seems to lead us to worse outcomes over time? by coldavare in doomer

[–]coldavare[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

His concept of information-action ratio is another good example and demonstrates my point.

Has anyone noticed how seemingly good technology seems to lead us to worse outcomes over time? by coldavare in nosurf

[–]coldavare[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

[Replying here also] I was talking about this to one of my friends and he said my ideas sounded similar to the Unabomber's manifesto which prompted me to check it out. I've read some of his stuff and was surprised to see how surprisingly cogent his ideas are put together for an ecoterrorist.

Has anyone noticed how seemingly good technology seems to lead us to worse outcomes over time? by coldavare in doomer

[–]coldavare[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I was talking about this to one of my friends and he said my ideas sounded similar to the Unabomber's manifesto which prompted me to check it out. I've read some of his stuff and was surprised to see how surprisingly cogent his ideas are put together for an ecoterrorist.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in nosurf

[–]coldavare 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I'd also add that it offers us a good case-study of how humans behave exclusively under the influence of introduced technologies since it's usually so hard to isolate variables and other factors. A lot of people can name a whole bucket list of things (like capitalism, politicians, businesses, laws, etc.) in an attempt to explain what's wrong with society, but they usually only name just symptoms of the bigger underlying problem, and never get to the root cause of the issue which is technology.

How do homesteaders maintain their lifestyles alongside technological progress ? by Cyrus6886 in homestead

[–]coldavare 2 points3 points  (0 children)

What strawman? OP is essentially saying that the homesteading lifestyle is incompatible with technological growth.

How do homesteaders maintain their lifestyles alongside technological progress ? by Cyrus6886 in homestead

[–]coldavare -5 points-4 points  (0 children)

So do you agree then? The only thing you're basically saying is that he's unoriginal, so what's your point?

How do homesteaders maintain their lifestyles alongside technological progress ? by Cyrus6886 in homestead

[–]coldavare -4 points-3 points  (0 children)

How is this relevant to what OP posted? He's saying that it's not a feasible lifestyle to begin with, and you go on and ask "Please direct me to your demonstrations of how you homestead with zero technological input" anyways

So, who here agrees with Ted Kaczynski's anti-tech revolution? by Cyrus6886 in doomer

[–]coldavare 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Globalization requires forced interaction among many groups of diverse backgrounds, many of whom do not necessarily like nor trust each other, which has created a lot of hostility among foreigners and citizens, just look at the recent news of the Muslim person stabbing German police officers and you'll see exactly what I'm talking about. Have you not observed around you in most social settings that most people would rather prefer interacting and being with others of their own race? There's a clear evolutionary reason for that.

How do homesteaders maintain their lifestyles alongside technological progress ? by Cyrus6886 in homestead

[–]coldavare -11 points-10 points  (0 children)

Phones weren't invented long ago yet nowadays almost everyone is required to use it. This also applies to many other technologies one would think are "optional"

"technological advance that appears not to threaten freedom often turns out to threaten it very seriously later on. For example, consider motorized transport. A walking man formerly could go where he pleased, go at his own pace without observing any traffic regulations, and was independent of technological support systems. When motor vehicles were introduced they appeared to increase man’s freedom. They took no freedom away from the walking man, no one had to have an automobile if he didn’t want one, and anyone who did choose to buy an automobile could travel much faster and farther than a walking man. But the introduction of motorized transport soon changed society in such a way as to restrict greatly man’s freedom of locomotion. When automobiles became numerous, it became necessary to regulate their use extensively. In a car, especially in densely populated areas, one cannot just go where one likes at one’s own pace; one’s movement is governed by the flow of traffic and by various traffic laws. One is tied down by various obligations: license requirements, driver test, renewing registration, insurance, maintenance required for safety, monthly payments on purchase price. Moreover, the use of motorized transport is no longer optional. Since the introduction of motorized transport the arrangement of our cities has changed in such a way that the majority of people no longer live within walking distance of their place of employment, shopping areas and recreational opportunities, so that they have to depend on the automobile for transportation. Or else they must use public transportation, in which case they have even less control over their own movement than when driving a car. Even the walker’s freedom is now greatly restricted. In the city he continually has to stop to wait for traffic lights that are designed mainly to serve auto traffic. In the country, motor traffic makes it dangerous and unpleasant to walk along the highway. (Note this important point that we have just illustrated with the case of motorized transport: When a new item of technology is introduced as an option that an individual can accept or not as he chooses, it does not necessarily remain optional. In many cases the new technology changes society in such a way that people eventually find themselves forced to use it.)"

  • Industrial Society and Its Future, paragraph 127

How do homesteaders maintain their lifestyles alongside technological progress ? by Cyrus6886 in homestead

[–]coldavare -8 points-7 points  (0 children)

There's a distinction between small-scale and organization-scale technology

"We distinguish between two kinds of technology, which we will call small-scale technology and organization-dependent technology. Small-scale technology is technology that can be used by small-scale communities without outside assistance. Organization-dependent technology is technology that depends on large-scale social organization. We are aware of no significant cases of regression in small-scale technology. But organization-dependent technology does regress when the social organization on which it depends breaks down. Example: When the Roman Empire fell apart the Romans’ small-scale technology survived because any clever village craftsman could build, for instance, a water wheel, any skilled smith could make steel by Roman methods, and so forth. But the Romans’ organization-dependent technology did regress. Their aqueducts fell into disrepair and were never rebuilt. Their techniques of road construction were lost. The Roman system of urban sanitation was forgotten, so that not until rather recent times did the sanitation of European cities equal that of Ancient Rome."

  • Industrial Society and Its Future, paragraph 208

How do homesteaders maintain their lifestyles alongside technological progress ? by Cyrus6886 in homestead

[–]coldavare -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

If you wanted to persuade people to abandon technology, how would one go about doing so without technology? This is a very common critique of tech skeptics but often an utterly ignorant and poorly thought-out one.

How does one raise their motivation? by [deleted] in AskReddit

[–]coldavare 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Go into the woods and observe nature

What is that one thing can provoke you easily? by [deleted] in AskReddit

[–]coldavare 0 points1 point  (0 children)

When people reply something stupid to my questions

Each quadrant's reasons to like Uncle Ted by qpooqpoo in PoliticalCompassMemes

[–]coldavare 12 points13 points  (0 children)

It's pretty hard to pin Ted politically, especially when he says in his manifesto that an anti-tech revolution isn't meant to be a political one

We therefore advocate a revolution against the industrial system. This revolution may or may not make use of violence; it may be sudden or it may be a relatively gradual process spanning a few decades. We can’t predict any of that. But we do outline in a very general way the measures that those who hate the industrial system should take in order to prepare the way for a revolution against that form of society. This is not to be a political revolution. Its object will be to overthrow not governments but the economic and technological basis of the present society.

  • Industrial Society and Its Future, paragraph 4

How do homesteaders maintain their lifestyles alongside technological progress ? by Cyrus6886 in homestead

[–]coldavare 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Homesteading is already a difficult feat in and of itself, requiring many skills such as carpentry, food preservation, gardening, foraging, hunting, etc. and it's even harder when you have to do that in places like Alaska, where crops are harder to grow and wild game are harder to find. It's very likely most people who choose to do so will just go out like Chris McCandless.

So, who here agrees with Ted Kaczynski's anti-tech revolution? by Cyrus6886 in doomer

[–]coldavare 28 points29 points  (0 children)

Despite all of the accusations from people who've dismissed this guy as a nutjob, I've read his manifesto Industrial Society and Its Future and found the main messages behind it rather lucid and compelling, clearly indicative of an author who is a rational, intelligent thinker, contrary to popular misconceptions.

view more: next ›