![]() ![]() Clearly though, new stories have value, and meaning, because people spend their time reading them and talking about them, voluntarily. I mean at some level it's always either Comedy or Tragedy. It's true if you break them down into their requisite parts, basically tokenize the tropes. ![]() But that can't be true, right? New, interesting stories get written every year. You mention "creating something that didn't exist before." One of the things that depressed me when I was studying writing, and often depresses young writers, is the realization that one way or the other, all stories have already been written, mostly by shakespeare (or at least, written down by him), or by a couple greeks, or a few rare influxes in the modern era as anthropologists finally started writing down what indigenous cultures have been saying for a few millenia. It's a somewhat similar question to "what do we do when we don't have to work to stay alive?" At least, I think it's similar, because there's two answers to both questions, both answers are the same, and both answers could apply today if we didn't prop up artificial scarcity: "Nothing, and, whatever we want." I keep asking the people in charge whenever I meet them, "what do we do when automation has driven the value of human labor to pennies?" And nobody ever has an answer. I want to think about this in broader scope though, because to me this is the question at the root of industrialization. So, maybe you already have a culturally defined reason this is not the case (developed by philosophers, and this includes priests if that's the case for you), or you have undergone a rigid philosophical introspection and determined for yourself why think isn't the case, or, maybe you just haven't thought of it, and when you do, a couple thousand years of philosophical insights will be ready for you to choose why, for you, things aren't futile (even if they are!). One reason I think this is that for some reason you don't already think everything is completely futile. I think I have a grasp on where you're coming from, and here's what I'm feeling: better philosophy, and better general education in philosophy, could be a good solution. Maybe some will, but the overwhelming majority of people will not want to dedicate time and energy to learning a craft that is completely futile in the end. Some people just want to have fun while they can, because eventually you end up in the dirt, no matter what you do (unless you come up with a way for humans to be immortal), like the rest of humanity.īut, seemingly you feel strongly about wanting people to work on those issues, so what do you spend your time on, on a daily basis? I'm guessing you are on the front line trying to solve one of these big issues? Not everyone can or want to save the world. Poverty falls into this bucket, where no matter how much software you write, you cannot solve poverty by just deploying programs. ![]() And if you're looking for something to solve via writing software, you won't attempt to solve that thing. They cannot be solved by just writing software. There is also the thing where some things are really not about technology, but are larger issues. Someone who is inclined to like images, AI, ML and programming are likely to work on "problems" where all of those intersect. Hackers mainly hack on things that personally affect them and things they find personally gratifying to work on. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |