A little illustrative sang froid:
Naemi has heard all the predictions of the dam’s imminent demise. “Sure, we have problems,” he says. “But the Americans are exaggerating. This dam is not going to collapse. Everything is going to be fine.”
I mean, come on, it’s not as if the 2016 effect could actually escalate.
Whatever else time travel may entail, it does not involve changing the past.
— Larry Dwyer (cited here).
Embedded citation: “I don’t have any interest in turning back the clock because I don’t believe it can be done. You can only observe and describe.” — Houellebecq
Anything not dealing with ratchets is wishing modernity away, rather than engaging it.
Fernandez on the escalation of irreversibility:
In Orwell’s view the mutability of the past was the foundation of tyranny. “Who controls the past controls the future; who controls the present controls the past.” To ensure this the Ministry of Truth was honeycombed with Memory Holes into which any inconvenient fact could be dropped and be disappeared. […] But just to illustrate how things have changed for the State we now know that Orwell was wrong. The mathematically dominant method for recording transactions, whether they involve the transfer of financial assets, intellectual property, health records or any type of information is probably going to be the blockchain. It has three important properties. First the entire record can be reproduced by anyone from a Genesis cryptographic starting such that all records will have the same signature if and only if they are the same. Second, no part of the record can be altered without regenerating the entire block chain from the beginning. Third, it is impossible to rewrite the block chain without incurring enormous real costs in electricity and computing power, as guaranteed by the laws of thermodynamics. […] The first property means that blockchain by nature it is a public ledger. The second ensures the database can only be falsified in its entirety. The third makes it prohibitively expensive to do so. …
There are still countless fools advising Cnut the Great to defy the waves, but time is not on their side.
Don’t be misled by the ambiguous escape at the end of Moon (2009). The movie as a whole makes the more far-reaching case. ‘Home’ is dead, and exists only as a simulation.
If it’s not obvious — after watching this excellent movie — why it explains the ‘Neo-‘ prefix in ‘Neoreaction’, I can’t help you. (Nothing can help you, in any case.)
May Gnon have a fortunate 2016 lined up for all you wretched sinners.
2015 has been intense, and deserves some considered retrospection here — but no way is it getting that now.
Feel free to stick succinct summaries of 2015 and short-term confident predictions / prophecies for 2016 here, if so inclined. You can be held to them later.
See everyone next year.
December 31, 2015admin
FILED UNDER :Review
TAGGED WITH :Time
Spare a thought for the numinous, the thing-in-itself, and the Great Filter tomorrow. If they all flow together, you can always have another drink.
(I’d say something nice, but that would trash the brand.)
Futurism is way too white male. The retrofutural Left-Molbuggian argument clinches it:
Time travel … is another thing that is a distinctly white male preoccupation — going back in time, for marginalized groups, means giving up more of their rights.
(Adopted from here, which is funny, despite the pitiful pandering.)
“Don’t anomalize my Zeitgeist bro!”
Derbyshire at the top of his game:
The whole climate change business is now a zone of hysteria, generating far more noise — mostly of a shrieking kind — than its importance justifies. Opinions about climate change are, as Greg Cochran said, “a mark of tribal membership.” It is also the case, as Greg also said, that “the world is never going to do much about in any event, regardless of the facts.” […] If we did do anything the effect would likely be puny compared to, say, a single major volcanic eruption. Mother Nature laughs at our climate change fretting. […] Consider ice ages for example, like the one we are currently living through.
Ice ages last for tens of millions of years. We don’t know how many there have been. Our planet is 4½ billion years old; we only have clear evidence of ice ages for the last billion years, in which time there have been four ice ages, covering a total of one-third of a billion years. In its “normal” condition — the other two-thirds — the Earth is ice-free all the way up to the poles. […] The present ice age started around 2½ million years ago. Our best guess is that it’ll continue for several million years more. […] Within this ice age there have been ups and downs. The downs are called “glaciations,” the ups — comparatively warm spells, like the one we are currently in — are “interglacials.” […] … The climatic changes here are sensational. At the peak of the last glaciation in 20,000 B.C., the pleasant suburb where I am writing this was buried under an ice sheet several hundred feet thick. It is possible that during one of the earlier ice ages, 700 million years ago, the entire planet was covered with ice, down to the equator.
The dwarfing of scientific concerns to media spin-cycle wavelengths has to be counted among the greatest vulgarizations of our age.