I would like to see a version of Caprica which wasn't a shitty teen drama, or one between Caprica and Galactica (e.g. the actual robot uprising.) Humans seems to have the potential to show similar, and Westworld seemed like it the first season, until hearing they were just going to go with season-long themeparks like the books. I really prefer sci-fi stories with a "how to get from A to B" where A and B are defined as things other than character development (the fucking Hero's journey has been done so many times it's an obscenity - oh you have a guy in a zombie-robot-techno apocalypse, he did some shit with a spaceship and a cute chick, he saved some shit, he got bored, series is over? yawn.) I'd like to see the "Breaking Bad" of the zombie apocalypse or the robot uprising or interstellar space travel if you're going to go the character development route at all - do it on the scale of civilizations. Fewer main characters and more main themes (that's more or less what made GoT and Battlestar Galactica so good actually - though the latter could use more of a "how the fuck did they get from Human to space faring demi-Gods" and the former could use less "you can tell the person is evil because he's a white male without any obvious physical deformities."
In other words something set in the future but reflecting the social and ethical atitudes of the past?
I would agree with the GP but define "social justice" as "direct or indirect commentary on the perceived ills of modern society or attempts at propaganda to influence society" - which accounts for easily 90% of modern entertainment. Entertainment is just that: entertainment. It isn't a vector for some liberal extremists who can't do anything else to try to change the world in their psychotic image of how things should be, it's not a soapbox, it's fucking entertainment. Entertainers are the modern equivalent of court jesters, not lords or trusted advisors - I expect to be fucking entertained if I have to pay a dime for it.
That doesn't mean "no plots or themes that touch on modern issues" but it does mean "everything comes out with some glorious image of the future while shitting on the past without any clue how they got from A to B." If you make the differences the central point of the plot (as most sci-fi shows have come to do over the years) it doesn't make any fucking sense that all the characters dwell on the past and the current state yet manage to completely ignore or just gloss over all the steps in between. You think you're ideas are going to lead to some fabulous utopian world, fucking great, how? If you can't outline the steps from point A to point B in detail with the pros and the cons - because all systems have them - but can manage "fun" episodes completely diverting from the plot or breaking the fourth wall or even a fucking hour of interpersonal drama and politics (oh God the fucking political commentary,) then it is not only not entertainment but it's a shit critique and low-tier propaganda to boot.
TL;DR: Fuck paid-for propaganda marketed as anything else.
An IM client which spies on me and logs all my conversations for Microsoft without so much as a decent search function for me to view my own archives. There's no reason to use Skype outside of a business environment where you have to do so, there are plenty of open source alternatives and there are plenty of more popular things if you can't get your friends to switch.
Actually, no. There is only one correct philosophy regardless of our thoughts on the matter but our only way to determine the correct one is on what we observe and in turn deduce. The philosophy that every action we take is fundamentally meaningless without immortality is the only logical conclusion to deduce from the currently available observations. You may believe it is different, you may believe it is different, but there is only one right answer and "different" isn't it.
The carry limits of the environment are not the same as a people's ability to extract resources from that environment. They are living at the absolute extent of their means, just as they always have.
Hell, we don't even know for sure that black holes can exist - a slight modification to Relativity, to homogenize how it treats gravitational energy fields with all other fields, renders black holes impossible at any mass, while remaining completely consistent with observations.
Depends which ones. Bitcoin is certainly not a currency: it's closer to a commodity (intrinsic value isn't a qualifier, just that it's a limited supply thing people want.) Ethereum is closer to a currency with its built in inflation rate over indefinite time. Curecoin is more of a point system for a charitable purpose to get people to donate computing cycles toward research. Some cryptocurrencies are more like securities in that they are direct translations to stocks in corporations or specific projects (in some cases the cryptocurrency even takes the place of stock altogether.) Most all the other alt-coins are just pyramid schemes, etc. Then you have things like Tether which exist just to facilitate USD transactions over different platforms (assuming the project leaders didn't just use the money, which I tend to doubt they did because a couple billion is more valuable generating interest, especially if it means they can just issue Tethers [or whatever they call their coin] to spend themselves and just keep the cash reinvested.) Then you have banks attempting to use blockchains to mitigate issues with interbank trading. The term cryptocurrency is a misnomer just because it is used generally to describe "blockchain implementations other than corporate ledgers" for the most part (the security versions could definitely qualify as a part of a corporate ledger, but there's already a pretty significant distinction between an inventory ledger and a stock ledger.)
Honestly, blockchain is just a technology and sadly with Bitcoin getting all the attention all cryptocurrencies are considered scams, because that is inherently what a useless commodity with rapid planned deflation after rapid planned inflation is.) The technology as a whole has a lot of potential for just about any ledger system, but 99% of those implementations are going to end up getting called "cryptocurrencies" just because of the limited vocabularies possessed by the average person. It's important to keep in mind the purpose and the algorithms driving a specific implementation when declaring it a "scam" or "gambling instrument" because while many are not all are (and certainly none of the blockchains with long term potential are.)
Are you joking? All of physics is based on math, without the math it's not physics and moreover fundamental aspects of physics are discovered millennia in advance within mathematics. The universe isn't just some contraption of odd particles with weird rules governing them which just formed: those are all derivatives of pure mathematical concepts which can exist no other way. That all aside though, the aspects of relativity what I have written is based on means that if any part of what I wrote is wrong all of relativity is wrong, there is no middle ground for you to throw one out and not the other. If you stuck to speaking on subjects you know however you would already know that or we simply wouldn't be having this conversation (for that matter, you should also know the math bit, damned pop-sci culture.)
They still feed themselves just fine: to the absolute limits of their food supply. That's the only difference between then and now: they have more resources now so they have more people. Nothing else has changed.
Our incomplete observations combined with relativity and some overzealous researchers trying to believe they know the entirety of the universe deciding they can just run the numbers and reverse to find the start leads to what you've described, not relativity (all the parts I'm basing my assumptions on have been repeatedly tested.) Incidentally, the whole heat death of the universe thing also boils down to the same thing, so if you're right and relativity is bullshit, I'm still right because you don't even need to avoid the heat death of the universe.
Tribalism is not "taking care of themselves just fine." They had all the same war and militias you were bitching about, just like everyone else on Earth, they just had it on a smaller scale because the population was more tightly constrained by resources.
Or just refine the time machine you used to avoid the heat death of the universe to snag people at the moment of death and move them to a common worldline.
Following the theory I outlined you are incredibly unlikely to encounter a time traveler. There would be a new worldline created every time someone traveled back in time, we could be on the original worldline or any of the practically infinite copies similar to the original worldline or we could be on some radically diverged version of a worldline where a time traveler from a more advanced people went back and fucked a monkey for the lulz. In any case the likelihood of two time travelers unintentionally encountering eachother on a worldline different from their origin, even if everyone and their mother had a time machine, would be practically zero and assuming they're sole intention isn't to go back and give the world time travel some number of years prior, knowing full well they live in a multiverse and it's all inconsequential to their origin anyway, then chances are we would never notice them. Also it's unlikely to be able to travel forward to the original worldline without a machine much more advanced than the massive abomination containing two black holes and all the support apparatus to hold them in fixed locations relative to one another I've outlined, so there wouldn't be much practical purpose to time travel unless you want to escape to start anew and we aren't exactly living in that great of a time. You have to keep in mind if that theory holds true every particle interaction creates a new set of universes bubbling out at the speed of light, if you were to travel back in time with such a device (containing an ergoregion you can safely traverse to/from between the outside universe) you would create a wake through spacetime (remember, time is only flowing backward relative to the outside, it's still going forward inside the ergoregion you'd be sitting in and therefore the impact of that would be seeping out the fairly large hole into the outside universe) more or less ensuring you never encounter your origin again (put another way, you'd have two massive blackholes hurdling back through time which were never there, even if only their gravity interacted with things that would be bound to change something.)
Are you genuinely retarded or what's the deal? I'm not suggesting ergospheres revitalize your body's health, I outlined how to build a time machine which aligns with what we know of general relativity to avoid the heat death of the universe. Maybe understand a subject before commenting? I mentioned the Kerr-Newman black hole for a very specific reason, names matter. Kerr = rotating (this creates the ergosphere [it's like half an event horizon, where time and space invert at different locations, creating an ergoregion of inverse time and normal space before you get to the event horizon which would rip you apart]) Kerr-Newman == rotating + charged, with a charge you can control the location and hold the two black holes the correct location apart (don't worry about how impractical that sounds, because it's really just an engineering challenge, you either have to have a big pair of black holes and some stellar-sized electromagnets or you have have an injection system to dump about the equivalent of mt Everest every second into a more manageable sized singularity - either way it's achievable within a couple billion years.
Slashdot Mirror
I would like to see a version of Caprica which wasn't a shitty teen drama, or one between Caprica and Galactica (e.g. the actual robot uprising.) Humans seems to have the potential to show similar, and Westworld seemed like it the first season, until hearing they were just going to go with season-long themeparks like the books. I really prefer sci-fi stories with a "how to get from A to B" where A and B are defined as things other than character development (the fucking Hero's journey has been done so many times it's an obscenity - oh you have a guy in a zombie-robot-techno apocalypse, he did some shit with a spaceship and a cute chick, he saved some shit, he got bored, series is over? yawn.) I'd like to see the "Breaking Bad" of the zombie apocalypse or the robot uprising or interstellar space travel if you're going to go the character development route at all - do it on the scale of civilizations. Fewer main characters and more main themes (that's more or less what made GoT and Battlestar Galactica so good actually - though the latter could use more of a "how the fuck did they get from Human to space faring demi-Gods" and the former could use less "you can tell the person is evil because he's a white male without any obvious physical deformities."
In other words something set in the future but reflecting the social and ethical atitudes of the past?
I would agree with the GP but define "social justice" as "direct or indirect commentary on the perceived ills of modern society or attempts at propaganda to influence society" - which accounts for easily 90% of modern entertainment. Entertainment is just that: entertainment. It isn't a vector for some liberal extremists who can't do anything else to try to change the world in their psychotic image of how things should be, it's not a soapbox, it's fucking entertainment. Entertainers are the modern equivalent of court jesters, not lords or trusted advisors - I expect to be fucking entertained if I have to pay a dime for it.
That doesn't mean "no plots or themes that touch on modern issues" but it does mean "everything comes out with some glorious image of the future while shitting on the past without any clue how they got from A to B." If you make the differences the central point of the plot (as most sci-fi shows have come to do over the years) it doesn't make any fucking sense that all the characters dwell on the past and the current state yet manage to completely ignore or just gloss over all the steps in between. You think you're ideas are going to lead to some fabulous utopian world, fucking great, how? If you can't outline the steps from point A to point B in detail with the pros and the cons - because all systems have them - but can manage "fun" episodes completely diverting from the plot or breaking the fourth wall or even a fucking hour of interpersonal drama and politics (oh God the fucking political commentary,) then it is not only not entertainment but it's a shit critique and low-tier propaganda to boot.
TL;DR: Fuck paid-for propaganda marketed as anything else.
An IM client which spies on me and logs all my conversations for Microsoft without so much as a decent search function for me to view my own archives. There's no reason to use Skype outside of a business environment where you have to do so, there are plenty of open source alternatives and there are plenty of more popular things if you can't get your friends to switch.
Actually, no. There is only one correct philosophy regardless of our thoughts on the matter but our only way to determine the correct one is on what we observe and in turn deduce. The philosophy that every action we take is fundamentally meaningless without immortality is the only logical conclusion to deduce from the currently available observations. You may believe it is different, you may believe it is different, but there is only one right answer and "different" isn't it.
We are able to say those things because we exist, a rock wouldn't care.
The carry limits of the environment are not the same as a people's ability to extract resources from that environment. They are living at the absolute extent of their means, just as they always have.
Hell, we don't even know for sure that black holes can exist - a slight modification to Relativity, to homogenize how it treats gravitational energy fields with all other fields, renders black holes impossible at any mass, while remaining completely consistent with observations.
You're full of shit.
Depends which ones. Bitcoin is certainly not a currency: it's closer to a commodity (intrinsic value isn't a qualifier, just that it's a limited supply thing people want.) Ethereum is closer to a currency with its built in inflation rate over indefinite time. Curecoin is more of a point system for a charitable purpose to get people to donate computing cycles toward research. Some cryptocurrencies are more like securities in that they are direct translations to stocks in corporations or specific projects (in some cases the cryptocurrency even takes the place of stock altogether.) Most all the other alt-coins are just pyramid schemes, etc. Then you have things like Tether which exist just to facilitate USD transactions over different platforms (assuming the project leaders didn't just use the money, which I tend to doubt they did because a couple billion is more valuable generating interest, especially if it means they can just issue Tethers [or whatever they call their coin] to spend themselves and just keep the cash reinvested.) Then you have banks attempting to use blockchains to mitigate issues with interbank trading. The term cryptocurrency is a misnomer just because it is used generally to describe "blockchain implementations other than corporate ledgers" for the most part (the security versions could definitely qualify as a part of a corporate ledger, but there's already a pretty significant distinction between an inventory ledger and a stock ledger.)
Honestly, blockchain is just a technology and sadly with Bitcoin getting all the attention all cryptocurrencies are considered scams, because that is inherently what a useless commodity with rapid planned deflation after rapid planned inflation is.) The technology as a whole has a lot of potential for just about any ledger system, but 99% of those implementations are going to end up getting called "cryptocurrencies" just because of the limited vocabularies possessed by the average person. It's important to keep in mind the purpose and the algorithms driving a specific implementation when declaring it a "scam" or "gambling instrument" because while many are not all are (and certainly none of the blockchains with long term potential are.)
If a government boot is on my neck there's going to be a God damned person's foot in it, I'll fight a robot.
That's a moot point when the species eventually dies anyway.
Actually, every post I've made is based in accepted physics, you would know that if your opinion was worth anything.
Are you joking? All of physics is based on math, without the math it's not physics and moreover fundamental aspects of physics are discovered millennia in advance within mathematics. The universe isn't just some contraption of odd particles with weird rules governing them which just formed: those are all derivatives of pure mathematical concepts which can exist no other way. That all aside though, the aspects of relativity what I have written is based on means that if any part of what I wrote is wrong all of relativity is wrong, there is no middle ground for you to throw one out and not the other. If you stuck to speaking on subjects you know however you would already know that or we simply wouldn't be having this conversation (for that matter, you should also know the math bit, damned pop-sci culture.)
They still feed themselves just fine: to the absolute limits of their food supply. That's the only difference between then and now: they have more resources now so they have more people. Nothing else has changed.
Our incomplete observations combined with relativity and some overzealous researchers trying to believe they know the entirety of the universe deciding they can just run the numbers and reverse to find the start leads to what you've described, not relativity (all the parts I'm basing my assumptions on have been repeatedly tested.) Incidentally, the whole heat death of the universe thing also boils down to the same thing, so if you're right and relativity is bullshit, I'm still right because you don't even need to avoid the heat death of the universe.
And see if they can horde every last penny in their reserves.
Tribalism is not "taking care of themselves just fine." They had all the same war and militias you were bitching about, just like everyone else on Earth, they just had it on a smaller scale because the population was more tightly constrained by resources.
Or just refine the time machine you used to avoid the heat death of the universe to snag people at the moment of death and move them to a common worldline.
Calling it "theoretical bullshit" is calling relativity bullshit. It fits perfectly within the bounds of relativity.
If we crack immortality and the heat death of the universe the next logical step is resurrection, they won't need to be remembered.
But you are worthless according to you. You aren't going to live forever. Or do you really think you will live forever?
I'd rather die trying than die not having tried and if the outcome is the same regardless why not try?
While I don't disagree, we don't actually know that each new generation isn't worse than before.
Purgatory for 100,000 years would still be preferable to death. You only have experience at all with life, good or bad.
You belong on Reddit, not /.
Following the theory I outlined you are incredibly unlikely to encounter a time traveler. There would be a new worldline created every time someone traveled back in time, we could be on the original worldline or any of the practically infinite copies similar to the original worldline or we could be on some radically diverged version of a worldline where a time traveler from a more advanced people went back and fucked a monkey for the lulz. In any case the likelihood of two time travelers unintentionally encountering eachother on a worldline different from their origin, even if everyone and their mother had a time machine, would be practically zero and assuming they're sole intention isn't to go back and give the world time travel some number of years prior, knowing full well they live in a multiverse and it's all inconsequential to their origin anyway, then chances are we would never notice them. Also it's unlikely to be able to travel forward to the original worldline without a machine much more advanced than the massive abomination containing two black holes and all the support apparatus to hold them in fixed locations relative to one another I've outlined, so there wouldn't be much practical purpose to time travel unless you want to escape to start anew and we aren't exactly living in that great of a time. You have to keep in mind if that theory holds true every particle interaction creates a new set of universes bubbling out at the speed of light, if you were to travel back in time with such a device (containing an ergoregion you can safely traverse to/from between the outside universe) you would create a wake through spacetime (remember, time is only flowing backward relative to the outside, it's still going forward inside the ergoregion you'd be sitting in and therefore the impact of that would be seeping out the fairly large hole into the outside universe) more or less ensuring you never encounter your origin again (put another way, you'd have two massive blackholes hurdling back through time which were never there, even if only their gravity interacted with things that would be bound to change something.)
Are you genuinely retarded or what's the deal? I'm not suggesting ergospheres revitalize your body's health, I outlined how to build a time machine which aligns with what we know of general relativity to avoid the heat death of the universe. Maybe understand a subject before commenting? I mentioned the Kerr-Newman black hole for a very specific reason, names matter. Kerr = rotating (this creates the ergosphere [it's like half an event horizon, where time and space invert at different locations, creating an ergoregion of inverse time and normal space before you get to the event horizon which would rip you apart]) Kerr-Newman == rotating + charged, with a charge you can control the location and hold the two black holes the correct location apart (don't worry about how impractical that sounds, because it's really just an engineering challenge, you either have to have a big pair of black holes and some stellar-sized electromagnets or you have have an injection system to dump about the equivalent of mt Everest every second into a more manageable sized singularity - either way it's achievable within a couple billion years.