[HN Gopher] If the News Is Fake, Imagine History
___________________________________________________________________
If the News Is Fake, Imagine History
Author : hunglee2
Score : 83 points
Date : 2022-07-11 21:53 UTC (1 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (thenetworkstate.com)
(TXT) w3m dump (thenetworkstate.com)
| jzellis wrote:
| I got really excited about Mr. Lee's Greater Hong Kong when I
| read Snow Crash when I was fifteen too. :-D
| baybal2 wrote:
| crikeyjoe wrote:
| spread_love wrote:
| > _The Intrepid Reporter [TV Tropes link] is as much of a stock
| character as the Evil Corporation. You don't hear much about the
| evil reporter, though_
|
| Er, like the Immoral Journalist?
| https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/ImmoralJournalis...
| The article _itself_ supposes the conclusion "the news is fake."
|
| > _You don't hear much about the evil communist, either._
|
| Uh...the Red Scare? This one is _incredibly_ easy to refute:
| https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/DirtyCommunists
|
| The author's counterargument?
|
| > _I'd bet the world has seen a >1000:1 ratio of scenes featuring
| evil capitalists to scenes featuring evil communists_
|
| They'd _bet_. Ok?
| ge96 wrote:
| History on a Blockchain
| adhesive_wombat wrote:
| ... Would do nothing to solve the issue as all it tells you is
| if that information was indeed once put on the chain. It
| doesn't ensure the information is actually correct.
| eruleman wrote:
| Title is originally from an @AmuseChimp tweet:
| https://twitter.com/AmuseChimp/status/906147488582787073?s=2...
|
| Probably one of his best.
| davidgerard wrote:
| taf2 wrote:
| A lot less money to be made from history
| tablespoon wrote:
| These guys appears to be pushing a pretty radical kind of
| political change, which doubtlessly influences whatever they're
| writing about "the news" and "history." This is apparently what
| they're about:
|
| https://book.thenetworkstate.com/the-network-state-in-one-se...:
|
| > The Network State in One Sentence
|
| > In one informal sentence:
|
| >> A network state is a highly aligned online community with a
| capacity for collective action that crowdfunds territory around
| the world and eventually gains diplomatic recognition from pre-
| existing states.
|
| > ...
|
| > Here's a more complex definition that extends that concept and
| pre-emptively covers many edge cases:
|
| >> A network state is a social network with a moral innovation, a
| sense of national consciousness, a recognized founder, a capacity
| for collective action, an in-person level of civility, an
| integrated cryptocurrency, a consensual government limited by a
| social smart contract, an archipelago of crowdfunded physical
| territories, a virtual capital, and an on-chain census that
| proves a large enough population, income, and real-estate
| footprint to attain a measure of diplomatic recognition.
|
| Tl;dr: another verbose anarcho-libertarian fantasy. I'm glad I
| had JS disabled so it started me on page 1 of 3,440, instead of
| in the middle.
| dataflow wrote:
| > and an on-chain census
|
| Sounds like yet another problem that blockchain ingeniously
| solves.
| dougmwne wrote:
| Oh dear lord, the United Microstates of Reddit Meme Subs is
| definitely going to nuke us all the first chance it gets. This
| wins my bad idea of the year award.
| hef19898 wrote:
| Maybe the Brits will sell them some old oil rigs or flag
| towers in international waters... I hear those are great to
| run pirate raduo stations from!
| kgwxd wrote:
| > Oh dear lord, the United Microstates of Reddit Meme Subs is
| definitely going to nuke us all the first chance it gets.
|
| r/BrandNewSentence
| Jeff_Brown wrote:
| > A network state [requires] ... a recognized founder ...
|
| Uh-huh.
| hef19898 wrote:
| Maybe too late bow, but how fast can one set up a
| networkstatecoin?
| beebmam wrote:
| >Put another way, what's the most powerful force on earth? In the
| 1800s, God. In the 1900s, the US military. And by the mid-2000s,
| encryption. Because as Assange put it, no amount of violence can
| solve certain kinds of math problems. So it doesn't matter how
| many nuclear weapons you have; if property or information is
| secured by cryptography, the state can't seize it without getting
| the solution to an equation.
|
| Yeah, I stopped reading here. It's incredible how confident this
| person tries to sound when it's clear that very few of these
| statements are supported by evidence and also don't follow from
| each other. Bizarre stuff.
| [deleted]
| jcranmer wrote:
| >> Put another way, what's the most powerful force on earth? In
| the 1800s, God.
|
| I mean... that's not merely a statement unsupported by
| evidence, that's a statement that's _demonstrably_ wrong. If I
| were to come up with a list of powerful forces in the Long 19th
| Century, "God" and "religion" wouldn't even come close to
| making it. It's a century that opens with the Enlightenment and
| reactions to it. The salient political features of the 19th
| century are the unhinging of the concept of divine right to
| rule, the social upheaval brought about by the Industrial
| Revolution, and the mighty juggernaut of nationalism that
| aroused passions and drove the world to several bloody
| conflicts, even in excess of the greatest and bloodiest wars of
| religion.
| tablespoon wrote:
| >> if property or information is secured by cryptography, the
| state can't seize it without getting the solution to an
| equation
|
| > Bizarre stuff.
|
| Yeah. No matter how much cryptography you have, a gun or bomb
| will still kill you. This idea that that state _really_ cares
| about whatever junk you 've encrypted sounds like the McGuffin
| in a cliche thriller.
| hef19898 wrote:
| Also, authorities confiacate quite some crypto all the
| time...
| tsimionescu wrote:
| > if property or information is secured by cryptography, the
| state can't seize it without getting the solution to an
| equation.
|
| This sort of reminds me of the Eddie Izzard "Flags" bit, except
| that someone is trying to claim the land _without_ the might of
| the British Empire behind them. Like, imagine the police coming
| to evict you from a house, and you confidently showing them
| that this ledger here says that it 's actually your house.
| ryanschneider wrote:
| I find the Network State manifesto laughable for a couple
| reasons:
|
| - I don't see how existing nations will ever allow "dual
| citizenship" with a network state.
|
| - and by extension how will these Network States actually defend
| themselves?
|
| - and based on this section they seem to be forecasting a Peter
| Zeihan style end of the current world order. If that happens
| cryptocurrency will be the first victim, not the savior: in a
| world where microchips are rare no one will want to waste them on
| anything not directly related to food or energy supply.
|
| Don't get me wrong: I highly recommend Zeihan's "The End of World
| is Just the Beginning" (caveat I'm only halfway done) but see
| it's predictions totally incompatible with the IMO wishful
| thinking of The Network State.
| dakial1 wrote:
| > I don't see how existing nations will ever allow "dual
| citizenship" with a network state.
|
| Aren't churches sort of network states?
| TazeTSchnitzel wrote:
| I upvoted this because I think it has some interesting parts, but
| there's also a lot of culture war and borderline conspiracy-
| theorist stuff that would have gotten it flagged off the front
| page if it were all the article contained.
| bshepard wrote:
| Nice motive, seriously, very prosocial -- which parts seemed
| most culture warrish to you? The whole network state program
| feels very unhinged to me from what an actual state is, but I
| also don't have a nice phone.
| bshepard wrote:
| While I understand the desire to claim that bifurcation has
| reached the point where the "America is not really a single
| "nation state" anymore" it is, in fact, still a nation state, in
| the same way that a family that fights a lot is still a family.
| Only this family, uh, rules the world. And unfortunately it also
| rules the world while pretending it doesn't rule the world.
| Acknowledging that you rule the world would be a good first step
| towards doing a better job at ruling it, but this acknowledgement
| is impossible within the given parameters of discourse, so a new
| discourse will likely emerge?
| shlurpy wrote:
| If they did, it would suddenly become that much more clear that
| the system is deeply antidemocratic, due to people not having
| any say in the institutions that govern them.
| dllthomas wrote:
| https://acoup.blog/2021/07/02/collections-my-country-isnt-a-...
| 99_00 wrote:
| Historians use historians from the past as secondary sources.
| They have never assumed that those sources were bias free. They
| don't assume the history they write is bias free. History is
| constantly being rewritten with different perspectives. This is
| History 101.
|
| Many people have forgotten that bias is the rule not the
| exception. Our institutions are built assuming bias exists and
| try to remove it to get desired outcomes.
|
| In our justice system: A court trial is two parties trying to
| present their own self interested and biased version with a judge
| enforcing predetermined rules.
|
| Scientific method exists in part to combat assumptions and bias.
|
| Experiments are constructed to remove bias.
|
| Papers are reviewed to remove bias.
|
| Why would the news or anything be bias free? In my mind, if you
| are assuming it's bias free, that's big red flag. Maybe you are
| just happy when your biases are confirmed and unhappy with any
| information that goes against your biases. Almost everyone is,
| after all. That's how human beings are wired and it's the duty of
| people who want to be more rational to constantly combat that.
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2022-07-11 23:00 UTC)