Industrial Society Puns

They would sleep for 3-4 hours usually starting just after nighttime set in, wake up for a few hours and then sleep for another 3-4 hours usually at sunrise. In historical documents from medieval Europe, the Roman Empire, and even in the Middle East and Asia, including plays by Shakespeare and even in the Oddesy, many cultures referred to it as the first sleepe, followed by the short wake period called the first watch, then the second sleepe.segmented sleepe

I want to add the quirk to my civilization that they have no wheeled vehicles. They have gears and pulleys and propellers and such, but not wheels. They do have naturally occurring floating spindles that they use to move stuff around.

For the scenario in my world, here are the details:

• An ethnicity of hunter-gatherers that existed around the end of the Pleistocene is transplanted to an enormous island.
• The founding population consists of about 50,000 people transported over the course of about 2,000 years.
• The island is ringed by rocky islets that make outward or inward travel impossible except in the smallest of watercraft. For the purposes of this scenario, assume that their only visitors come from societies of equal technological levels to them, and even these are occasional.
• The island is rich in most minerals other than fossil fuels and nuclear materials. Certain minerals like gold are still proportionately rare enough to serve as possible currency standards, though.
• The island's only mountain chain is arranged along part of the island's coasts, with virtually no habitable land on the other side before the ocean begins, so there's less chance of the ethnic group diverging into more ethnicities.
• The island has a navigable river, excellent for transportation, and, due to annual flooding, farming. (Edit, separate from the one below: I'm considering just having the area be fertile on its own, without any flooding, so that hydropower is easier.)
• The island contains whatever domesticable crops and animals were in the people's original homeland during the time they were originally there. Let's say that the group is Eurasian and thus has access to plenty of both.
• The island has a reliable growing season.

Can they reach an industrial revolution?

(Edit: Rephrased the sentence about the river.)

Have any of you read Ted Kaczynski’s manifesto? I don’t agree with his conclusion that a violent revolution is an appropriate response to the situation. But I definitely agree that our civilization has reached a place where life within it is ironically dehumanizing. And large-scale social engineering and unnatual biological meddling are required just to keep everybody peacefully in line. He seems like a real doomer lol.

http://editions-hache.com/essais/pdf/kaczynski2.pdf

INDUSTRIAL SOCIETY AND ITS FUTURE

Introduction 1. The Industrial Revolution and its consequences have been a disaster Tor the human race. They have greatly increased the life-expectancy of those of us who live in "advanced" countries, but they hitvc destabilized society, have made life unfulfilling, have subjected human beings to indignities, have led to widespread psychological suffering (in the Third World to physical suffering as well) and have inflicted severe damage on the natural world. The continued development of technology will worsen the situation. Il will certainly subject human beings lo greater indignities and inflict greater damage on the natural world, it will probably lead to greater social disruption and psychological suffering, and it may lead to increased physical suffering even in "advanced" countries.

2. The industrial-technological system may survive or it may break down. If it survives, it may eventually achieve a low level of physical and psychological suffering, but only after passing through a long and very painful period of adjustment and only at the cost of permanently reducing human beings and many other living organisms lo engineered products and mere cogs in the social machine. Furthermore, if the system survives, the consequences will be inevitable; There is no way of reforming or modifying the system so as lo prevent it from depriving people of dignity and autonomy.

3. If (lie system breaks down the consequences will still be very painful. But the bigger the system grows the more disastrous the results of its breakdown will be, so if it is to break down il had best break down sooner rather than later.

4. We therefore advocate a revolution against ihe industrial system. This revolution may or may not make use of violence: il may he sudden or il may be a relatively gradual process spanning a few decades. We can'l predict any of that. Bui we do outline in n very general way the measures that those who hale the industrial system should take in order to prepare the way for a revolution against that form or society. This is not lo be a political revolution. Its object will be lo overt h ro w not governments but the economic and technological basis of Ihe present society.

5. In this mliclc we give atlcnlion to only some of ihe negative developments Hurt have grown out of llie industrial-technological system. Other such developments we mention only briefly or ignore altogether. This d

Flight Cancellations may be a Reliable Measure of Failure of Industrial Society

A simple and reliable metric of societal failure is not readily available to the public. A simple metric such as the number of deaths in a society or the overall economic activity of a society is not adequate, as these metrics are often released to the public with significant interpretation or delay. A metric which is easily accessible and which can be used to estimate societal failure is required.

In this post, flight cancellation data from the United States which was collected from the Statista website [1] and other freely available sources is used to show that measuring societal failure using flight cancellations is possible, and show that flight cancellation data may be a reliable metric for the estimation of failure.

As societal complexity is at a very high level, public infrastructure is likely to be challenged by a variety of threats including natural disasters, cascading failure, and energy shortages. Such events have the potential to significantly disrupt the delivery of essential services and cause widespread economic loss.

An early indicator of impending natural or infrastructure failure is the occurrence of mass flight cancellations. Flight cancellations coincide with infrastructure failure in the past. The U.S. airline industry experienced a number of mass flight cancellations in the 1970s [2]. The recent pipeline ransomware attack also forced flight changes [3]. A twenty year high in U.S. flight cancellations occured during the high fuel prices of 2008, which also coincided with the worldwide housing market collapse. This high disregards the 2020 coronavirus pandemic, which is also an indication of failure in industrial society. The current 2021 year shows cancellations peaking in July during widely reported "supply chain shortages" and remain at a high level [4].

The number of flight cancellations may therefore be an indicator of societal failure. Flight cancellations have not been the only indicator of societal failure. The total number of vehicle accidents in the U.S. has not been declining [5]. However, the total number of vehicle accidents is not a reliable indicator of societal failure as there are many other factors which influence the number of vehicle accidents.

How can we identify the sources of flight cancellations?

Flight cancellations are a result of many different factors, such as aircraft production, aircraft maintenance, flight cre

I've seen people also argue that our larger brains are the result of being "more evolved". The amount of people that hold these views is astounding. It demonstrates that most people have a misunderstanding of evolution because there is no such thing as a species being "more evolved". In fact using the word "more" in the context of evolution implies that evolution has a direction that is to be followed and a finish line, neither of which is true. For example, the human evolutionary line has been evolving for the same amount of time as chimpanzee evolutionary line, as we share a common ancestor, but we have evolved differently, not more.

Doesn't this argument only prove that human beings have arbitrarily self-assigned value to the fact that we have larger brains and live in a complex civilization? I'm assuming those of you that question the "progress" of civilization would be against these arguments?

Has anyone thought about the inherent negative karma of being a normal person in a developed country in 2021? I'm not going to pull up numbers but I'm sure the energy that goes into lighting and heating my home, fueling my car, and making my clothes and all the convenient products I use could go towards feeding a multitude of starving children. Not to mention that the waste products I contribute to producing will probably wipe us all out in a couple hundred years, and are already wiping out non-human beings every moment. Am I gonna be reborn in Naraka or what?

This would simplify mob grinders

I have thought a lot about the surplus labor theory of value and while I have much to learn I at least see how it can form the basis of a theory of exploitation. I am less sure though how to apply it in a modern context where so much of the economy is untethered to the production except in the abstract. Any thought or reading recommendations would be welcome

I think I recall that they're looking to do the Bible for the Nano/Micro/Minidosing episodes, but I think the Ted Kaczynski manifesto would be WAY more interesting for them to discuss. Especially when you have the differing viewpoints of Big T and Arian. Thoughts?

Also, here's a link to the text: https://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/national/longterm/unabomber/manifesto.text.htm

Turns out the Unabomber was spot on the money with his prophecies of technocratic rule. Here's a revisit to his infamous manifesto. #WorldEconomicForum #Metaverse #GreatReset

https://subterrain.org/essays/ted-kaczynski-industrial-society-and-its-future-revisited

INTRODUCTION

1. The Industrial Revolution and its consequences have been a disaster for the human race. They have greatly increased the Iffe-expectancy of those of us who live in "advanced" countries, but they have destabilized society, have made life unfulfilling, have subjected human beings to indignities, have led to widespread psychological suffering (in the Third World to physical suffering as well) and have inflicted severe damage on the natural world. The continued development of technology will worsen the situation. It will certainly subject human being to greater indignities and inflict greater damage on the natural world, it will probably lead to greater social disruption and psychological suffering, and it may lead to increased physical suffering even in "advanced" countries.

2. The industrial-technological system may survive or it may break down. If it survives, it MAY eventually achieve a low level of physical and psychological sutfering, but only after passing through a long and very painful period of adjustment and only at the cost of permanently reducing human beings and many other living organisms to engineered products and mere cogs in the social machine. Furthermore, if the system survives, the consequences will be inevitable: There is no way of reforming or modifying the system so as to prevent it from depriving people of dignity and autonomy.

3. If the system breaks down the consequences will still be very painful. But the bigger the system grows the more disastrous the results of its breakdown will be, so if it is to break down it had best break down sooner rather than later.

4. 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.

5. In this article we give attention to only some of the negative developments that have grown out of the industrial-technological system. Other such developments we mention only briefly or ignore altogether. This does not mean that we regard these other developments as unimportant. For practical

1. the industrial revolution and its consequences have been a disaster for the human race. they have greatly increased the life expectancy of those of us who live in advanced countries, but they have destabilised society, have made life unfulfilling, have subjected human beings to indignities, have led to widespread psychological suffering in the third world to physical suffering as well and have inflicted severe damage on the natural world. the continued development of technology will worsen the situation, it will certainly subject human beings to greater indignities and inflict greater damage on the natural world, it will probably lead to greater social disruption and psychological suffering and it may lead to increased physical suffering even in advanced countries.

2. The industrial-technological system may survive or it may break down. If it survives, it MAY eventually achieve a low level of physical and psychological suffering, but only after passing through a long and very painful period of adjustment and only at the cost of permanently reducing human beings and many other living organisms to engineered products and mere cogs in the social machine. Furthermore, if the system survives, the consequences will be inevitable: There is no way of reforming or modifying the system so as to prevent it from depriving people of dignity and autonomy

3. If the system breaks down the consequences will still be very painful. But the bigger the system grows the more disastrous the results of its breakdown will be, so if it is to break down it had best break down sooner rather than later

4. 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

5. In this article we give attention to only some of the negative developments that have grown out of the industrial-technological system. Other such developments we mention only briefly or ignore altogether. This does not mean that we regard these other developments as unimportant. For practical reasons we have t