#and then maybe after the cataclysm he was filling in the power vacuum after the lord of amrita's death (first hydro archon)

[dottores]

crying hysterically i have such a good fic idea for post-cataclysm teyvat but i just dont have enough time for another series rn

[meret118]

Excerpt:

All of the threatened destruction He Who Remains foretells to follow his ��death” will come about, he says, because the other versions of him are even worse. Like a textbook autocrat, He Who Remains suggests that he alone can fix things, that he alone is the key. “I keep you safe,” he tells Loki and Sylvie, and then the threat: “And if you think I’m evil, well, just wait till you meet my variants.” He Who Remains is entirely self-aware of what he and his fascist time bureaucracy stand for, suggesting that the “gambit” is “Stifling order or cataclysmic chaos.”

What Sylvie chooses not to elect for is that “stifling order” that has kept her and so many others crushed underfoot. Loki may think He Who Remains is telling the truth, and maybe He Who Remains is doing so from his perspective, but Sylvie refuses to accede to He Who Remains’ maxim that “You may hate the dictator, but something far worse is gonna fill that void if you depose of him.” She does hate the dictator, and the threat of something worse rings hollow after all that she’s suffered. At least by getting rid of the dictator, there’s the chance of achieving a different outcome eventually.

Every dictator since the dawn of time has said something similar to He Who Remains’ declaration. We aren’t meant to think they should stay in power just because of the possibility of an unknown power vacuum thereafter. Sometimes a little cataclysmic chaos and uncertainty are necessary before a better system of living can emerge.

---------

This is why I HATED the finale. The MCU is saying dictatorship is better than free will! This is especially egregious to me at a time when fascism is on the rise and democracies are falling all over the world.

[and-then-there-were-n0ne]

If scientific discoveries and technological developments split humankind into a mass of useless humans and a small elite of upgraded superhumans, or if authority shifts altogether away from human beings into the hands of highly intelligent algorithms, then liberalism will collapse. What new religions or ideologies might fill the resulting vacuum and guide the subsequent evolution of our godlike descendants?

The new religions are unlikely to emerge from the caves of Afghanistan or from the madrasas of the Middle East. Rather, they will emerge from research laboratories. Just as socialism took over the world by promising salvation through steam and electricity, so in the coming decades new techno-religions may conquer the world by promising salvation through algorithms and genes.

Despite all the talk of radical Islam and Christian fundamentalism, the most interesting place in the world from a religious perspective is not the Islamic State or the Bible Belt, but Silicon Valley. That’s where hi-tech gurus are brewing for us brave new religions that have little to do with God, and everything to do with technology. They promise all the old prizes – happiness, peace, prosperity and even eternal life – but here on earth with the help of technology, rather than after death with the help of celestial beings.

These new techno-religions can be divided into two main types: techno-humanism and data religion. Techno-humanism agrees that Homo sapiens as we know it has run its historical course and will no longer be relevant in the future, but concludes that we should therefore use technology in order to create Homo deus – a much superior human model. Homo deus will retain some essential human features, but will also enjoy upgraded physical and mental abilities that will enable it to hold its own even against the most sophisticated non-conscious algorithms. Since intelligence is decoupling from consciousness, and since non-conscious intelligence is developing at breakneck speed, humans must actively upgrade their minds if they want to stay in the game.

Dataism says that the universe consists of data flows, and the value of any phenomenon or entity is determined by its contribution to data processing. This may strike you as some eccentric fringe notion, but in fact it has already conquered most of the scientific establishment. Dataism was born from the explosive confluence of two scientific tidal waves. In the 150 years since Charles Darwin published On the Origin of Species, the life sciences have come to see organisms as biochemical algorithms. Simultaneously, in the eight decades since Alan Turing formulated the idea of a Turing Machine, computer scientists have learned to engineer increasingly sophisticated electronic algorithms. Dataism puts the two together, pointing out that exactly the same mathematical laws apply to both biochemical and electronic algorithms. Dataism thereby collapses the barrier between animals and machines, and expects electronic algorithms to eventually decipher and outperform biochemical algorithms.

For politicians, business people and ordinary consumers, Dataism offers groundbreaking technologies and immense new powers. For scholars and intellectuals it also promises to provide the scientific holy grail that has eluded us for centuries: a single overarching theory that unifies all the scientific disciplines from literature and musicology to economics and biology. According to Dataism, King Lear and the flu virus are just two patterns of data flow that can be analysed using the same basic concepts and tools. This idea is extremely attractive. It gives all scientists a common language, builds bridges over academic rifts and easily exports insights across disciplinary borders. Musicologists, political scientists and cell biologists can finally understand each other.

In the process, Dataism inverts the traditional pyramid of learning. Hitherto, data was seen as only the first step in a long chain of intellectual activity. Humans were supposed to distil data into information, information into knowledge, and knowledge into wisdom. However, Dataists believe that humans can no longer cope with the immense flows of data, hence they cannot distil data into information, let alone into knowledge or wisdom. The work of processing data should therefore be entrusted to electronic algorithms, whose capacity far exceeds that of the human brain. In practice, this means that Dataists are sceptical about human knowledge and wisdom, and prefer to put their trust in Big Data and computer algorithms.

Dataism is most firmly entrenched in its two mother disciplines: computer science and biology. Of the two, biology is the more important. It was the biological embracement of Dataism that turned a limited breakthrough in computer science into a world-shattering cataclysm that may completely transform the very nature of life. You may not agree with the idea that organisms are algorithms, and that giraffes, tomatoes and human beings are just different methods for processing data. But you should know that this is current scientific dogma, and that it is changing our world beyond recognition.

Not only individual organisms are seen today as data-processing systems, but also entire societies such as beehives, bacteria colonies, forests and human cities. Economists increasingly interpret the economy, too, as a data-processing system. Laypeople believe that the economy consists of peasants growing wheat, workers manufacturing clothes, and customers buying bread and underpants. Yet experts see the economy as a mechanism for gathering data about desires and abilities, and turning this data into decisions.

According to this view, free-market capitalism and state-controlled communism aren’t competing ideologies, ethical creeds or political institutions. At bottom, they are competing data-processing systems. Capitalism uses distributed processing, whereas communism relies on centralised processing.

Capitalism did not defeat communism because capitalism was more ethical, because individual liberties are sacred or because God was angry with the heathen communists. Rather, capitalism won the Cold War because distributed data processing works better than centralised data processing, at least in periods of accelerating technological changes. The central committee of the Communist Party just could not deal with the rapidly changing world of the late twentieth century. When all data is accumulated in one secret bunker, and all important decisions are taken by a group of elderly apparatchiks, you can produce nuclear bombs by the cartload, but you won’t get an Apple or a Wikipedia.

There is a story (probably apocryphal, like most good stories) that when Mikhail Gorbachev tried to resuscitate the moribund Soviet economy, he sent one of his chief aids to London to find out what Thatcherism was all about, and how a capitalist system actually functioned. The hosts took their Soviet visitor on a tour of the City, of the London stock exchange and of the London School of Economics, where he had lengthy talks with bank managers, entrepreneurs and professors. After a few hours, the Soviet expert burst out: ‘Just one moment, please. Forget about all these complicated economic theories. We have been going back and forth across London for a whole day now, and there’s one thing I cannot understand. Back in Moscow, our finest minds are working on the bread supply system, and yet there are such long queues in every bakery and grocery store. Here in London live millions of people, and we have passed today in front of many shops and supermarkets, yet I haven’t seen a single bread queue. Please take me to meet the person in charge of supplying bread to London. I must learn his secret.’ The hosts scratched their heads, thought for a moment, and said: ‘Nobody is in charge of supplying bread to London.’

That’s the capitalist secret of success. No central processing unit monopolises all the data on the London bread supply. The information flows freely between millions of consumers and producers, bakers and tycoons, farmers and scientists. Market forces determine the price of bread, the number of loaves baked each day and the research-and-development priorities. If market forces make the wrong decision, they soon correct themselves, or so capitalists believe. For our current purposes, it doesn’t matter whether the theory is correct. The crucial thing is that the theory understands economics in terms of data processing.

[…] Dataism naturally has its critics and heretics. As we saw in Chapter 3, it’s doubtful whether life can really be reduced to data flows. In particular, at present we have no idea how or why data flows could produce consciousness and subjective experiences. Maybe we’ll have a good explanation in twenty years. But maybe we’ll discover that organisms aren’t algorithms after all.

It is equally doubtful whether life boils down to decision-making. Under Dataist influence, both the life sciences and the social sciences have become obsessed with decision-making processes, as if that’s all there is to life. But is it so? Sensations, emotions and thoughts certainly play an important part in making decisions, but is that their sole meaning? Dataism gains a better and better understanding of decision-making processes, but it might be adopting an increasingly skewed view of life.

[…] Of course, even if Dataism is wrong and organisms aren’t just algorithms, it won’t necessarily prevent Dataism from taking over the world. Many previous religions gained enormous popularity and power despite their factual mistakes. If Christianity and communism could do it, why not Dataism? Dataism has especially good prospects, because it is currently spreading across all scientific disciplines. A unified scientific paradigm may easily become an unassailable dogma. It is very difficult to contest a scientific paradigm, but up till now, no single paradigm was adopted by the entire scientific establishment. Hence scholars in one field could always import heretical views from outside. But if everyone from musicologists to biologists uses the same Dataist paradigm, interdisciplinary excursions will serve only to strengthen the paradigm further. Consequently even if the paradigm is flawed, it would be extremely difficult to resist it.

- Yuval Noah Harari, The Data Religion in Homo Deus: A Brief History of Tomorrow

[dkehoe]

This week in my Blogger to Blogger Series I am highlighting Kat from the blog Life and Other Disasters. Kat loves to talk about the TV shows she’s watching, the books she is reading and shares other tidbits about her life. Her blog is a lot of fun and when you check it out you will take a deep dive into Kats life and thoughts.

Check it out by clicking this link! Life and Other Disasters

Let’s get to the questions!

Blogging is universal and even though we inhabit the same community, we don’t always live in the same country. What country do you live in?

KAT: I was born and raised in Austria, where I still live to this day even if I do disappear for a couple months to go elsewhere every now and then. I could very much imagine moving away someday, maybe to an English-speaking country.

What is the view outside your front door? (Include a picture if you’d like!)

KAT: I live in an apartment complex, so the view really isn’t that great. I like that we are on the top floor, even though a lot of the surrounding area is now under construction with more apartments already there or coming soon, which has kind of ruined the view a little bit. I used to be able to see hills in the distance and that’s unfortunately not happening anymore.

Most blogs have a quirky name and a fun story of origin. Please share the story behind your blogs name?

KAT: I wish there was a good story to my blog name, but I think that the movie title “Love and Other Disasters” just always stuck with me and I adapted it into “Life and Other Disasters” for my own uses, especially because I didn’t want the blog name to just be about books.

Describe where you write your blog. Include a picture if you’d like!

KAT: Hmmm … there’s definitely not one place in particular I tend to write my blog at. I sometimes lounge on the couch, other times I am at the desk in my room, then I just make it work on my bed and if I am in the right mood, I even write at Starbucks. Although I prefer to work on my book when I am there and not on my blog. (I’ve included a picture that shows the backside of my closet with character aesthetics for my book “Arcadia” as well as some of the pillows on my bed)

Most of us have a stack of books sitting next to our couch or bed waiting to be read. What books are in your stack? (Include a photo if you’d like!)

This is a mix of the books I am currently reading or about to read as well as my sketchbooks for drawing and painting.

Want to check out the books on her nightstand? Read the Synopsis’ below!

Synopsis: The Immortalists by Chloe Benjamin

If you knew the date of your death, how would you live your life?

It’s 1969 in New York City’s Lower East Side, and word has spread of the arrival of a mystical woman, a traveling psychic who claims to be able to tell anyone the day they will die. The Gold children—four adolescents on the cusp of self-awareness—sneak out to hear their fortunes.

The prophecies inform their next five decades. Golden-boy Simon escapes to the West Coast, searching for love in ’80s San Francisco; dreamy Klara becomes a Las Vegas magician, obsessed with blurring reality and fantasy; eldest son Daniel seeks security as an army doctor post-9/11; and bookish Varya throws herself into longevity research, where she tests the boundary between science and immortality.

A sweeping novel of remarkable ambition and depth, The Immortalists��probes the line between destiny and choice, reality and illusion, this world and the next. It is a deeply moving testament to the power of story, the nature of belief, and the unrelenting pull of familial bonds.

Synopsis: Beastly Bones (Jackaby #2) by William Ritter

In 1892, New Fiddleham, New England, things are never quite what they seem, especially when Abigail Rook and her eccentric employer, R. F. Jackaby, are called upon to investigate the supernatural.

First vicious shape-shifters disguise themselves as a litter of kittens, and a day later, their owner is found murdered. Then in nearby Gad’s Valley, now home to the exiled New Fiddleham police detective Charlie Cane, dinosaur bones from a recent dig mysteriously go missing, and an unidentifiable beast starts attacking animals and people, leaving mangled bodies behind. Charlie calls on Abigail for help, and soon Abigail and Jackaby are on the hunt for a thief, a monster, and a murderer.

Synopsis: Only Human by Silvain Neuvel

Brilliant scientist Rose Franklin has devoted her adult life to solving the mystery she accidentally stumbled upon as a child: a huge metal hand buried beneath the ground outside Deadwood, South Dakota. The discovery set in motion a cataclysmic chain of events with geopolitical ramifications. Rose and the Earth Defense Corps raced to master the enigmatic technology, as giant robots suddenly descended on Earth’s most populous cities, killing one hundred million people in the process. Though Rose and her team were able to fend off the attack, their victory was short-lived. The mysterious invaders retreated, disappearing from the shattered planet . . . but they took the scientist and her crew with them.

Now, after nearly ten years on another world, Rose returns to find a devastating new war—this time between humans. America and Russia are locked in combat, fighting to fill the power vacuum left behind after the invasion. Families are torn apart, friends become bitter enemies, and countries collapse in the wake of the battling superpowers. It appears the aliens left behind their titanic death machines so humankind will obliterate itself. Rose is determined to find a solution, whatever it takes. But will she become a pawn in a doomsday game no one can win?

If you have had a bad day and want to spend an hour reading a book, what is your go to genre or favorite book that will lift your mood?

KAT: If I had a bad day, there are generally two options for me. One would be to indulge the bad mood and go into something very emotional like a family drama or some sort of tragic love story. However, the other option would be to really just dive into a light and fluffy YA contemporary. Something that wouldn’t require too much thinking but mainly entertainment.

When you aren’t blogging, how do you spend your time? Work, Play, School?

Admittedly, I do spend A LOT of time on my laptop. I am currently working on my own Fantasy book (it’s called Arcadia and if anyone is interested you can find more details on it here: https://lifeandotherdisasters.com/2018/02/05/lets-talk-about-arcadia/) and I am obsessed with TV shows, so I definitely have a screen with me at most times. I also really like to draw and have indulged in that hobby more and more lately.

What is your favorite blog post you’ve ever written? Please include the link!

Last year I went abroad and didn’t have as much time for blogging during that time as I used to have. My content changed a lot and I struggled to know my place in the community, which lead me to write a post about “blogger identity”. It was something that really weighed on me at the time, but it helped me so much to put my frustration into words. I feel like I have found my way since, but the support at the time was really helpful.

Discussion Time: Blogger Identity

(I think we can all identify with an identity crisis on our blogs! I certainly have!)

Have you ever met one of your favorite authors? If so, what did you say to them? Looking back, what do you wish you had said instead? I haven’t really met any of my favourite authors yet, as they don’t really tend to visit my country a lot. However, I have had the opportunity to see Nicholas Sparks and Cecelia Ahern, who were both very nice. There wasn’t really time to say much, as the line was pretty long and we were ushered along quickly. I am pretty sure I thanked them and told them which book was my favourite, but I don’t wish I had said something more.

If you could sit down with an author for a slice of cake and a question, who is the author, what kind of cake would you serve, and what is the first question you’d ask? I would give right about anything to meet Pierce Brown, so he would definitely be the author I’d want to meet. I am not sure which cake he likes the most, that would need some research I don’t have the resources for right now, but my go-to-cake would be the red-wine cake after my grandma’s recipe. I don’t know anyone who doesn’t love that cake. And lastly the question, I think I’d go with something really stupid like “How do I get a part or job on set of the adaptation of your books?” and then I would immediately laugh it off and take it back, while in all honesty, I would love to be on that set.

  I loved getting to know Kat a little bit better! I can see we share a love for YA and Fantasy novels. I have had both William Ritter’s Jackaby series and Pierce Brown’s Red Rising series on my TBR forever! It’s always nice to hear how much someone loves an author, it makes me want to just reach for that book next, doesn’t it? Oh, and Kat, I’m dying to try that red wine cake. Would you share the recipe?

Thanks Kat!!

Do you share Kat’s taste in novels? If not, I’d love to hear what books are on your own nightstand!

Deb

  Blogger to Blogger Series: An Interview with Kat from Life and Other Diasters This week in my Blogger to Blogger Series I am highlighting Kat from the blog Life and Other Disasters.