I don’t really have much to say… it kind of speaks for itself. I do appreciate the table of contents so you don’t get lost in the short paragraphs though

  • swlabr@awful.systems
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    11
    ·
    1 year ago

    This is all less techno-optimism and more techno-pollyannaism (Pollyantics?). Nothing about this smug, lazy, idealistic ignorance surprises me, yet I am enraged.

    • swlabr@awful.systems
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      11
      ·
      1 year ago

      Thought a bit more on this. These people (Marky Marc, Stinker, every other tescreature etc.) go around saying “technology makes it better” (paraphrasing), but never perform any critical thinking to argue it successfully.

      This manifesto is just a brutish barrage of buzzwords to brain you into buying into it. It’s as if you trained an LLM on Jay Shetty videos and WallStreetBets. Reading it is the equivalent of the Brawndo scene from idiocracy. You could just replace every line with “Technology! It’s what human civilisation craves!” and you’d have the same amount of intellectual content.

      I mean at this point I’m more mad that this article is so shit and low effort. Marky Marc could have just written a high school level essay about what “better” means for human civilisation and how technology achieves that, and he probably wouldn’t be getting roasted on HN. Hell, even Stinker at least cherrypicks some metrics when he’s up to his pollyantics.

      Why does he even include the first section that handwaves away the real and valid concerns about technology? It makes it sound like the text will discuss those issues, but he never does. I mean sure, this is supposed to be techno-optimist dogma, but right now it’s just scientismic-pollyanna dogshit.