82,891
edits
Rubbish maxims: Difference between revisions
no edit summary
Amwelladmin (talk | contribs) No edit summary Tags: Mobile edit Mobile web edit |
Amwelladmin (talk | contribs) No edit summary Tags: Mobile edit Mobile web edit |
||
| Line 9: | Line 9: | ||
*{{shitmaxim|It takes being let down to appreciate those who lift you up. Be a lifter}} — or, be the one who lets people down and have an equal impact. | *{{shitmaxim|It takes being let down to appreciate those who lift you up. Be a lifter}} — or, be the one who lets people down and have an equal impact. | ||
*{{shitmaxim|Believe this: You are exquisite. You are exceptional. You are limitless.}} — or, better still, ''don’t'' believe it since, if you are seeking spiritual guidance from [[LinkedIn]] it almost certainly isn’t true — at least, not in a good way. Even if it might be, there’s much less scope for injury and disappointment if you proceed by assuming it isn’t. | *{{shitmaxim|Believe this: You are exquisite. You are exceptional. You are limitless.}} — or, better still, ''don’t'' believe it since, if you are seeking spiritual guidance from [[LinkedIn]] it almost certainly isn’t true — at least, not in a good way. Even if it might be, there’s much less scope for injury and disappointment if you proceed by assuming it isn’t. | ||
*{{Shitmaxim|We will all have more leisure time in the future}} — this isn't [[LinkedIn]] [[yogababble]] so much as delusional conventional wisdom from the thought leaders of the day. Examples are {{author|Daniel Susskind}} in his fantastical {{br|A World Without Work}} and David Goodhart in | *{{Shitmaxim|We will all have more leisure time in the future}} — this isn't [[LinkedIn]] [[yogababble]] so much as delusional conventional wisdom from the thought leaders of the day. Examples are {{author|Daniel Susskind}} in his fantastical {{br|A World Without Work}} and {{author|David Goodhart}} in his otherwise excellent {{br|Head Hand Heart}}. The idea that robots and artificial intelligence will entirely supplant the need for human labour assumes that a manual activity which can be entirely and cheaply automated will nonetheless hold its value, that an economy to which the majority of participants do not what contribute will still function more or less as normal, and that the economy not only can be fully determined but has been: that our current polity is in some kind of fully taxonomised, Taylorised final state in which no new activities or work categories can emerge, and all that do currently exist can be more effectively carried out by machine. These three assumptions being transparently absurd, this gets the [[Yngwie Malmsteen paradox]] 180° back to front. increasing automation will create more risk, not less semi-colon will generate more complexity not less, and and will lead to more catastrophe, not less. We will all be kept busy. | ||