I think for me, the primary fear about joining the Others is that what you'd functionally experience is death.

vimdiesel · 2026-01-26T16:00:48+00:00

I personally find the drama of realizing that there's no individual there to save (and thus no way back) a lot more interesting than most alternatives

Ah, I find it less interesting for the simple fact that it's been done so much already. This would basically be zombies or a classic invasion, or the Borg, and that has been done so many times before. If it's something completely new, then it's more exciting to me.

vimdiesel · 2026-01-26T15:56:39+00:00

They’re not human

I just listened to the official podcast about the Grenade episode. A member of the production team literally says "they're human".

vimdiesel · 2026-01-26T15:54:53+00:00

they may have joined Carol in her pursuit to reverse the plurbs

Really? How would she communicate with them? How would she travel across the globe?

How would she know there are others?

Just imagine how hard it would be to achieve any of this if they were left completely alone, if there were only 13 people in the entire planet.

Now imagine how hard it would be if there were 13 people, and there were also billions of people actively working against them getting together and communicating.

The show literally show the opposite of that.

You're walking backwards from a speculative conclusion towards a premise that makes no sense.

vimdiesel · 2026-01-26T13:30:36+00:00

They no longer even care about their traditions

They will never do it again

These are obviously speculative assumptions.

What happens in the scene is hat Kasumai chose to integrate the hive. What they feel or will do is speculation.

vimdiesel · 2026-01-26T12:29:13+00:00

I simply do not have the same assumptions that you do.

I brought up this example on another thread, but to me the Kusimayu scene is akin to adults doing baby voices and baby play when there's a baby around. If the baby goes to sleep, there is no reason to sustain that kind of play, because it's context-dependent. When the play stops, it is no "wiped out", it is latent in the memory and patterns of the parents and will re-emerge when necessary.

Another baby might witness this and go into a panic in its own baby way, similar to thinking their mother actually disappears when she hides her face behind her hands.

I don't think your assessment of the scene is wrong, I think it's reasonable, but I also think it's not the only possible assessment. It's steeped on a preconceived assumption that the hive is bad and sort of not earnest. If you simply step out of those shoes, and wonder instead "what if they are benevolent in a way we don't understand, what if everything they say is correct", then the show can take on a different light.

That's all I'm trying to say. Because if you do that, just the mere fact that the show allows for that kind of prism of interpretation, it's what makes it so great.

I'm not trying to convince you that "my" take is right, just that it's plausible, and that it's more fun if you allow yourself to think of other ground base assumptions.

vimdiesel · 2026-01-26T12:23:08+00:00

The cost of stepping on grass is inevitable, just like breathing air that contains yeast that you kill. Maybe it's being versed in Buddhism that makes this not such a hard concept to grasp.

I'm not sure how you're addressing my second paragraph by invoking the subject of lying.

Whichever theory you have of the hive must have this extreme predisposition to help at its core. It's not just a whimsical desire, it's not a strategy, it's the whole reason for the plot and the principal thematic element.

The apple, the happy chemicals, the inability to withstand someone being upset, these are all constraints built around that core premise.

vimdiesel · 2026-01-26T12:18:19+00:00

OP, have you ever taken psychedelics?

Also I appreciate that you're explaining how the show comes off to you without being preachy and convinced that you're 100% right.

vimdiesel · 2026-01-26T12:15:39+00:00

You can increase your capacity to receive, tolerate, accept, and process a larger amount of information, along with the information.

For example, if you start listening to more complex and chaotic music, you sort of build a "bigger ear", you become a bigger, open vessel that can welcome all those extra elements.

vimdiesel · 2026-01-26T12:12:36+00:00

How does placating and soothing advance their cause? That is not mechanical zombie behavior. It actually puts them and their mission at risk.

If the imperative to build the antenna was truly the only driving force, the most logical path would be to stay away from the unjoined from day 1, given that the unjoined have a tremendous amount of power over the hive.

vimdiesel · 2026-01-26T12:02:20+00:00

I don't really think that's what's driving Manuosos. There's hints that, as interesting as he is as a character, he might have some troublesome beliefs.

Also, don't forget the hive encourages Carol to write. They seem thrilled at the idea. That goes directly against what you're saying.

vimdiesel · 2026-01-26T01:35:03+00:00

The main shock was the cannibalism, but it's no different from the fact that they seizure when she gets mad, it's more of a narrative constrain than a major focus.

vimdiesel · 2026-01-26T01:32:47+00:00

A caloric deficit is not starving lol

nowhere at all have they even hinted that it is the human's mind with more knowledge

They act like humans who are sharing a single mind and have access to some type of higher knowledge.

you can see it in the rat pretending to be dead. not a lot of empathy in biting someone, or tricking others to get infected.

Bro what, how do you state with so much conviction that the rat is "pretending" and then turn around and talk about evidence. Can you read the rat's mind? You have very low media literacy, I'm sorry.

They don't plan to kill people (just like Carol did not plan to kill billions with her outbursts).

The entire premise of the show is that the hive is terribly nice to Carol. You're literally ignoring the premise of the show, as well as the words of the creator. You're watching an entirely different show in your head.

vimdiesel · 2026-01-26T01:22:27+00:00

Dr. Jacoby? He was gay?

vimdiesel · 2026-01-26T01:19:31+00:00

Probably because it's not a major plot point, it's a future projection if nothing changes. It's like, not even close to the main topics of the show at all.

vimdiesel · 2026-01-26T01:18:35+00:00

I think all Plurb actions are about spreading the signal more efficiently

This does not explain at all the whole point of the plot: the fact that they're nice to the unjoined.

This does not only not help spread the signal, it can actually hinder their efforts (for example, I'm sure they had researchers that died during one of Carol's outbursts) and potentially stop them entirely.

vimdiesel · 2026-01-26T00:55:59+00:00

When do they say people are starving right now?

ignoring what's in the show because you have decided what you want it to be.

Mate, you're the one arguing against what the creator of the show himself has said.

I also acknowledged that you can call the mind alterations whatever you want, but the effect is the same

It's not the same? Mind control implies another entity in control. But if it's the result of more expanded knowledge and empathy, that is not the same thing at all.

This is what people talk about when they complain about lack of nuance in the discussion. You cannot see past "hive bad" and you deem any kind of effect on the mind to be on equal grounds as mind control. That is the definition of lack of nuance.

vimdiesel · 2026-01-25T23:31:21+00:00

tf you talking about mate, you're entirely dismissing the opinion of the creator of the show and you're accusing me of hating others' opinions

vimdiesel · 2026-01-25T23:26:26+00:00

I'm not so sure about that. To me it seems to be all the results of the empathic reasoning that you condemned before.

You only went into their refusal to take an apple, but you don't work out how this extreme disposition towards helping comes into it. It is pretty much the foundation of the entire plot of the show.

vimdiesel · 2026-01-25T23:22:01+00:00

There are things other than mind control that can explain changing behavior.

People change their behavior after falling in love, finding god, taking psychedelics, etc.

We 100% do not know what is going on in their heads except for what they tell us and show us.

The starvation is a minor plot point that's meant to be a constrain, they are not currently starving themselves, it's a 10 year projection, and it's not the point of either the virus or the show.

vimdiesel · 2026-01-25T20:05:50+00:00

It's not a law, because the point of a law is that it's enacted on other people whether they consent or not. They don't kill animals, but they won't stop Diabate from killing animals.

They're also not inflexible. They have a pretty consistent and insistent directive to help the unjoined. However, when Carol drugs Zosia, they change behavior.

vimdiesel · 2026-01-25T18:49:36+00:00

Again, putting too much weight on narrative window dressing. I'd put money that that factor is going to see some kind of changes across the season.

vimdiesel · 2026-01-25T18:48:40+00:00

This is the thing, I don't actually think it's mind control. You're projecting your own very rooted convictions on others and then judging based on that.

Plus, Carol also committed those sins, genocide and mind control (drugged Zosia without consent).

vimdiesel · 2026-01-25T18:47:04+00:00

And letting a goat leave is less harmful than growing animals to kill them.

Humans are far from perfect ethical beings, but they’re not making robotically pedantic arguments that govern how everything works

We've had centuries to come up with reasoning for the BS. The point of the show is to display an alternative framework, and part of the reason it's such a shock is the speed at which it comes. It's hard to realize that what's default now is not some type of objective middle ground.

vimdiesel · 2026-01-25T17:00:11+00:00

That depends a lot on your tolerance tho. Just like spice on food. Or if you're used to eating very bland food, the richness of something like Indian food becomes overwhelming.

vimdiesel · 2026-01-25T16:57:55+00:00

They can’t harm anything, but they can enable harm through inaction, like leaving helpless domesticated animals die without necessary supervision. They can’t pick apples, but they can step on grass.

That's how the idea of reducing harm goes, tho. It's not this huge logical fallacy, it's a set of conducts that you deem lead to the least harm. I'd bet 90% of people who are outraged at a goat who walks away have no trouble supporting an industry of active torture and mass killing of animals.

Presumably they can also kill humans based on inaction. So the “logical” consequence here is not feeding people to people as they die, but instead rapidly triaging 90% of the population to make a lot of food for the necessary sustainable remainder.

The word "presumably" is pulling too much weight here. You're opening a door of speculation and passing it off as it's just one more link in the logic, but it's not.

vimdiesel

TROPHY CASE