/lit/ - Literature

>>21513411
That’s the kicker.
He doesn’t

There's every chance in the world that Nick Land in completing a mural using his own shit on the walls of some Chinese covid gulag right now.

>>21513437
*is completing

Hopefully he's just dead.

>>21513411
philosophy got so bored of itself that they just started going
>what if we just fuck things up on purpose as fast as possible
i dont understand why nick land gets talked about at all. hes just insane. who the fuck would think china is a good idea. insane. they're not bringing their best. china... china is not made up of the good people. you know what im talking about.

>>21513411
He hasn't done philosophy in years. Just being a boomer on twitter.

>>21513448
the muslims in the west indeed, but we surveil them so it's okay for the most part

his whole thing is that basically the AI (Cthulhu) in the future is going to kill us all and there is nothing we can do to stop it, and he is like one of those cultists from hp love craft story cheering it on

>>21513448
this is what happens when academia gets so fucked up it only values novelty. it just rewards people for pushing bad ideas because nobody else has pushed them so brazenly before.

>>21513411
Sounds like a psued convincing other psueds that Star Trek is real

>>21513437
Do the Chinese not like Land?

>>21513506
Well they've been fighting over it for centuries.

HEYOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!

>>21513514
I capitalized the ‘L’ you illiterate FAGGOT. Your joke FLOPPED.

>>21513534
Listen, I have nowhere else to go.

>>21513411
Accelerationists never truly believe the world they're making will be better. They just want to kill the one they currently inhabit. The ones who say they're confident in the future haven't sufficiently considered the implications or are lying to themselves.

How do they plan to accelerate? What does that even mean?

Nick Lands schizo babble online just seems like nonsense to me but I’m not very familiar with him either.

So, he doesn’t like capitalism either? Why then does he court right wingers? Does he think the leftist solutions are not viable or just that they aren’t likely to be successful?

>>21513716
>Why then does he court right wingers?
?
capitalism is a fundamentally liberal enterprise

>>21513411
if it doesnt't land in the one he likes, simply accelerate furthere to the one he does.

>>21513534
are "Faggot" and "Flopped" proper nouns too?

>>21513733
What’s your point? Answer the question(s). Mainly I’m trying to understand the thought process here.

>>21513599
Only decent reply ITT. People claim to be R/acc, L/acc or whatever but truth is these people are simply tacking their own teleology onto an atelological phenomena. Accelerating towards what you want is not only incoherent, it’s also impossible, since culture/society is a complex system that cannot be driven by any one actor towards their desired outcome. The only true accelerationist position is U/acc, since it at least acknowledges the limits of our influence and that capitalism has an accelerative vector completely beyond our control.

>>21513514
Kek

>>21513411
For the nth time, accelerationism is not something one does, but rather—observes.

>>21514700
Basé.

>>21513469
yep. hes counter-initiation.

I don't trust ideologies based on predictions.
Go play Miss Cleo somewhere else, clerk.

>>21514700
don't you mean Z/acc?

>>21513437
He is back on twitter. He is alive.

>>21513411
>wants
Wrong.

>>21513534
I think Anon's joke landed

>>21513437

He's been compromised by the CCP

>>21513411
I WANT TO BREAK NICK LAND'S WILL TO BREATHE AND MAKE HIM ASPIRATE HIS VAPOURISED LIMBS.

Its amazing how much attention people on lit pay to the ramblings of a literal schizo.

Nick Land doesn't care what happens to humanity (that presumeably includes himself) as long as technology advances. He thinks being the rocket fuel that burns up in order to send crafts into outer space is a glorious destiny for mankind

it's not about good or bad, is it? it's not about liking or not liking, normal human values don't come into consideration when talking about accelerationism, the whole idea is that it's inevitable. the rise of technology and capitalism will continue happening and land thinks slowing it down or controlling it in any way is not the most efficient way forward. the future might look bleak, but it's inevitably the future, why not push the pedal to the metal and see what happens.

>>21513534
You took the L, Bro, anons joke bombed, literally spat out my drink (frappucino)

Accelerationism is genuinely fucking moronic.
>if we help our enemies and take absolutely no political action... we win :)
>hehe... they don't know that us helping them leads to their own demise...
>i am very smart
Absolutely harebrained

>>21520055
That's a different Accelerationism babe.

>>21519272
BOMBED means it didn't succeed bro
you're proving that anon's joke only succeeded in making ESL midwits laugh... you just proved the other anon right..

What did he mean by Neochina arrives from the future?

>>21521221
It takes a trope of cyberpunk fiction, namely, the cultural ascendency of China in some speculative future, and uses it to make a point about retro-causality/retroactive self-assembly. Capitalism is not a social construct but rather an autonomous, self-optimising force operating on the present from the future that has provided the conditions for its own realisation.

>>21521506
then neochina is nothing special since all countries grow, even north korea develops new nukes

>>21513476

If you think academia "rewarded" land you need to have your citizenship revoked

>>21520055
Lol idiot

>>21513411

He doesn't like it, he writes extensively on how unbelievably torturous modernity is at the human level. Accelerationism is a thesis of history, a read of human progress as the advancement of technocapital singularity and intelligence-production, with everything else (including everything humans value) as artifacts of that process and collateral damage. He isn't an advocate, he's a doomsayer.

>>21521681

Frankly, it's astounding how many brainlets misunderstand Land. His philosophy engages with phenomena on time horizons far beyond the human lifespan and sensorium. Think about storm-chasers — do you really think those lunatics are "pro-tornado," that they enjoy the ravaging of human production by forces beyond us? Of course not, but nonetheless they gleefully greet the maelstrom with a kind of envious fascination. Land is precisely the same, except with what he calls the Outside.

>>21521688
>Land is precisely the same, except with what he calls the Outside.
He's taken too much ketamine and not enough hours of work in the lecturers' association defending injured members.

>>21513437
>>21513446
He's been back tweeting every day since last October

>>21521665
You know how in the 80s future movies there's Japanese moon runes everywhere? Same shit again but with Chyna

>>21521720

>not enough hours of work in the lecturers' association defending injured members

Sounds boring and gay. Also, he wrote coherently about all this before the drugs, they just made his prose better.

>>21513514

>>21521665
It’s not about growth but cultural ascendancy. Neochina is to the world of the future what America is to the world of today (though the balance is already shifting).

>>21521728
>Also, he wrote coherently about all this before the drugs, they just made his prose better.
You don't need much ketamine to take Mao's worse is better and extend it into the infinite regress.

>boring and gay
Ecce homo.

>>21513476
Yeah academia should pursue noble purposes like finding you a gf

>>21513437
No, he is likely living a capitalist life in China and maybe a comfortable one

If you read his writings from his drugged out cult meetings he is clearly an insane man

So people will probably read more of him if anything else is published as well

>>21523541

As in, people will probably read more of him if he is published again, already has a serious readership

>>21518387

As far as we know he is a member of the CCP and has power within it, most Chinese citizens are not in the party though

The CCP is only 6-7% of the population

>>21518387

Also, no need for racist imagery against Asians

>>21514700
What about Christian Accelerationism?

>>21523569

You can't just add a worldly philosophy to Christianity and expect it to work well

That is how you get a Jim Jones situation

It's disrespectful to God and you will pay a heavy price if you pay, a quick path to insanity

>>21523622
No, but hear me out.

We are all in a general agreement that the Modern world, the world birthed by the Enlightenment and the Reformation, is fundamentally opposed to Christ, and opposed to God. I speak of course of the Liberal world order, which posits the absolute freedom of the human individual to do as they choose, unmoored from creed or commitment. This is of course of the Devil, and it has directly resulted in the general atheism that plagues the world today.

So the natural thing to do is to get rid of the world as it currently exists, right? To do away with the current order of things, because it is anti-Christian.

This is a kind of accelerationism. To vote for certain candidates, support certain parties, champion certain factions, for the express purpose of killing the Modern world, the world of the Enlightenment, because that world is an Anti-Christ. To even support war, tumult, strife, and ruin, purely to bring an end to the Modern, Liberal world order which so thoroughly opposes Christ and the Church.

Of course this accelerationism is to be paired with a general strengthening of Christian institutions, like the Church, like the various monasteries and religious orders. The seeds of a future Christendom should be planted and nurtured even as the present Anti-Christian world's demise is hastened.

But if the Modern world is such an enemy of Christ, why should its continued existence be tolerated? And if, rather, it is now showing weakness, beginning to fail and dissolve, why should Christians do anything else but hasten its demise? Whatever future that results will have brighter prospects for Christianity.

>>21513411
Land is a retard. He stopped posting because I humiliated him repeatedly during his Xenosystems days, simply by pulling at the seams of his idiotic thought process. As for Accelerationism, it is nonsense, because it is based on false premises:

1. That Capital and Intelligence (production) are somehow isomorphic. This is he kind of claim that's not right, but is not even wrong; no wonder then that Land makes appeals to gibberish production machines like Deleuze & Guattari -- via "deterritorialization" -- to justify this inane equivalence. I will not belabor this point further.
2. That intelligence is some kind of attractor in, let's call it "universal fitness space" -- which is itself based on two sub-hypotheses:
2a. That intelligence is evolutionarily robust, as opposed to fragile i.e. it is a perennial winning strategy. This is an empirically disproven claim. The irony here is that one of Land's pet peeves during his Xenosystems "era" was dysgenics. The cognitive dissonance was too much I imagine, which is why I suspect he ended up "devolving" into a jelly-brained boomer in recent years.
2b. That some kind of evolutionary process is baked into the cake of existence itself, at every scale, not being limited to living organisms. This is, to say the least, highly speculative (granted, it is the least stupid of his assumptions).

Given these 2 assumptions, Land's point is then that Capital, once coming into being, can only continue existing and getting better and better at outcompeting any other thing, not limited to economic systems, but encompassing any system in the universe, including life itself. So then, there is no point in trying to stop this process, nor try to slow it, since it is inevitable. Then the only real option is to subsume yourself into it and accelerate the process. NOT to get the process to die (since, given Land's assumptions, its death is an ontological impossibility) but merely to be on the right side of history, as it were: the winning side, which is the only right side.

>>21523569
>>21523642
You just don't get it. See >>21523753

You cannot tack on "Christian" as an epithet to a philosophical position which is tantamount to "you should die so that Mammon may come into being faster".

>>21521688
This is the only other post ITT that seems to actually understand what Land means by "Accelerationism".

>>21523753

All of those premises seem extremely convincing, even obvious, to me.

>>21521739
jej

>>21521506
>talks about china
>posts pic from japan

His eschatology is one of AI laboring in man's memory

How is Nick Land even different from Hegel?

>>21525999
Hegel was a literate academic who taught classes.

Nick Land is a party boy.

>>21525999

This is bait, but just read Land's book on Bataille (which is actually about german idealism, he just needed to do something wacky to get published)

>>21513411
discord.gg/NJ3nRUZKdU

>>21524980
Probably because you're a twit.

>>21526283

Let's see if what you're talking about has any legs:

>That Capital and Intelligence (production) are somehow isomorphic... Land makes appeals to gibberish production machines like Deleuze & Guattari -- via "deterritorialization" -- to justify this inane equivalence.

You seem to have this backwards. For Land, the phenomena outlined by Deleuze and Guattari (who've apparently filtered you, lmao) are downstream from his ideas about teleoplexy.

>That intelligence is evolutionarily robust, as opposed to fragile i.e. it is a perennial winning strategy. This is an empirically disproven claim.

This is laughable on the face of it. The fact that we've locked up so much entropy in the computers necessary for you to type that inane bullshit suggests otherwise – where is it empirically disproven?

>some kind of evolutionary process is baked into the cake of existence itself, at every scale, not being limited to living organisms. This is, to say the least, highly speculative

It isn't highly speculative at all, it's consensus. Everybody believes this. This is how biology works, this is how markets work, it is a necessary fundament of a resource-constrained universe.

>Land's point is then that Capital, once coming into being, can only continue existing and getting better and better at outcompeting any other thing, not limited to economic systems, but encompassing any system in the universe, including life itself. So then, there is no point in trying to stop this process, nor try to slow it, since it is inevitable. Then the only real option is to subsume yourself into it and accelerate the process.

There is in fact no point in trying to stop this in the long term, but that doesn't mean the only option is to be subsumed. It's just an inevitability that in one way or another we will be.

>given Land's assumptions, its death is an ontological impossibility

This is nonsense. Death is an inevitability in Land's work, I'm not sure how you could come to this conclusion if you've read even a small fraction of his work.

>>21526320
He's trying to smuggle the Marx out of Land, rather than realising that Land is just a reaction to the inhuman scale of Capital's generation of its own antithesis. Like if we were sitting around in 1100 and I told you that the development of towns would eventually result in a new set of human relations that outcompeted men on horses with further men on horses you'd laugh at me, or follow me in a millennial heretical cult for liberation from lords.

Land has just started a millennial heretical cult that is pro-Lord.

And he needs to be dismembered while ketamine is administered.

>>21526320
>You seem to have this backwards.
I didn't and it is completely irrelevant even if I had, since the argument rests on them being in some sense the same process, not on some purported ontological hierarchy between them. This is a classic case of "proving too much" because you can only establish an equivalence by ignoring/discarding many salient and essential properties of what makes an agent "intelligent", thereby rendering the term meaningless: random noise can be "intelligent" under this redefinition. That to you the equivalence is sensible only shows that you haven't really thought it through.

>we've locked up so much entropy in the computers
Computers are not intelligent. At all. Not in the least. You can only call them "intelligent" by redefining the term to the point of meaninglessness, which by necessity Land does.

>where is it empirically disproven?
Do you have dyslexia? I already pointed it out: intelligence has been selected against in human populations for the past 200 years. There are several studies that document this, including studies that investigate the population genetics aspects of it, including a pretty big one from Iceland (genes that contribute to intelligence are being selected out of the population).

>It isn't highly speculative at all, it's consensus.
You are retarded. A veritable midwit. Biology does not exhaust all of existence. Even derived ideas about evolution like cultural evolution (non-biological evolution of societies) )are highly controversial/disputed. And the borrowing of the term into economics comes with large caveats that render it a very different thing, being mostly a metaphor or a mere analogy. Pro-tip: markets lack a unit of selection. A market isn't even a thing, but an epiphenomenon, so they couldn't have a unit of selection that can be inherited. Typical of the average /lit/ard however, for you metaphor and analogy is enough. Except not really, because it's obvious you even struggle with reading simple text. Because you don't think, and understand nothing of the world around you. Stick to fiction, brainlet.

>This is nonsense.
I must once again ask: are you dyslexic?
Yes, death is a given, but what lands out of the premises is the fact that the process cannot be stopped. Learn to read, shit-for-brains.

>the only option is to be subsumed. It's just an inevitability that in one way or another we will be.
Nice, a distinction without a difference. You really are a special kind of imbecile.

>>21528418
>>21526320
> if you've read even a small fraction of his work.
Oh and by the way, I've only read a small fraction of his work and hold it in contempt, so I refuse to waste any more of my time with his "work". Land is stupid and uninformed, as are you. Have a wonderful day you drooling retard.

>>21513716
>So, he doesn’t like capitalism either? Why then does he court right wingers? Does he think the leftist solutions are not viable or just that they aren’t likely to be successful?
look at this fucking retard and laugh

>>21513469
Wasn't that also Mitchell Heisman's view? Is there some connection between them?

>>21527089
based grumpy marxist

>>21513411
Accelerationism is the very antithesis of all political and social outcomes, and zeitgeists. It affirms the continual elongation of all politicization methods across the entire spectrum in order to make systemic processes buckle under the sheer weight of their bullshit. It is the very manifestation of nihilism, but in a rather vitalist fashion, that seeks to wrench the stars away from humanity's moldy grasp.
No more meat for the grinder, no fuel for the engines. Let it all fade into nothing.
There is no future to speak of, why bother wasting away to glimpse that outcome? Better to run headfirst into that pit.

>>21526320
>where is it empirically disproven?
Ever heard of the Fermi paradox? Of IQ shredders?

Why do you think billions of years of life only produced one species with intelligence, in a fraction of the time? How integral does intelligence seem for evolution? How sustainable does modern intelligence seem?

>>21528440
>since the argument rests on them being in some sense the same process
no it doesn't. I don't even think you have a clear understanding of what the "argument" is, which is odd because you seem to have invented it yourself for the sake of losing an argument on 4chan.

>intelligence has been selected against in human populations for the past 200 years
Specious evidence on this one, teleoplexy remains intact as an idea despite bifurcation of the human species. Also, 200 years is a very short period of time. Push that back to 400 or 4000 and you see the opposite on a much greater scale.

>Yes, death is a given, but what lands out of the premises is the fact that the process cannot be stopped.
So is it an inevitability or an "ontological impossibility"? The two are not compatible.

>I've only read a small fraction of his work

I can tell. You've got no idea what Land is actually arguing, and as far as I can tell you seem to be seething about a philosophical framework that you've fabricated wholesale in your own mind.

>>21528641
>Ever heard of the Fermi paradox? Of IQ shredders?
You cannot tout the Fermi paradox as empirical evidence lmao. Pointing at "IQ shredders" is nonsense as well, one can acknowledge local minima of retardation without buying into the insane postulate that there is a useful definition of intelligence that doesn't involve it being evolutionarily beneficial.

i sometimes believe in the line "things have to get much worse before they can get better" am i an accelerationist

>>21513411
Isn't the point that the future he wants to accelerate towards will be so horrible that it will collapse and something better can replace it?

>>21528526
They just both came of age in the heyday of cyberpunk

>>21529050
>You cannot tout the Fermi paradox as empirical evidence lmao.
Why in the fuck not? If our skies were teeming with intelligent aliens star trek style it'd be the first natural inference that intelligence pays off. As it happens, the Earth is relatively young and humanity more so, and yet we're still lonely. One look at any of the exponential metrics of civilization over a few thousand years and one is utterly blown away as to how billions of years of the rest of universe hasn't produced shit.

One only needs to consider the evolutionary history of Earth itself to guess why. Billions of years of evolution, and there has been no trace of selection for intelligence as such. No overarching progression towards it. Humanity is just one data point, extremely anomalous and volatile at that. Absolutely no inference can be made. It's just a spark with no sign of long term presence nor sustainability yet.

>>21513437
what are you talking about? he posts on twitter every day

>>21529503
He was totally absent from it from last April to October and people thought the Red Chinese imprisoned him for thought crimes

I kinda want to see the complexity of society unwind due to the lack of exergy as the price of energy inputs rise remorselessly and prove many economic activities unaffordable. I want to see space nutters who think we are going to live on Mars or who think some technological singularity is imminent BTFO and the smug grins wiped off the faces of the technology boosters once they realise it's going to end with hordes fighting over the remnants of what was once civilisation and no magic technofix is coming to the rescue. Does that make me an accelerationist or just a spiteful cunt?

Thought experiments are stupid
>what if we did this bad thing, like what would happen lol? I’m sure it’d turn out good. What? I have no idea if it’ll be better, it’s good because it’s different!
And you wonder why no one actually entertains these ideas.
There has never been a playbook for actual change that ended up being effective

>>21514700
>cannot be driven by any one actor towards their desired outcome
Uh, yes it can
Have you even read anything by Land?

>>21529486

You've dragged me down to realms of midwittery I thought I had forsaken permanently, but: absence of evidence is not evidence of absence/

>>21529640

It makes you retarded

>>21529640
It unironically makes you no better than the masses and their grotesque masters. Willing to see the rest of humanity dragged down to the abyss because of the disastrous actions of a few uppity "elites" is no different than the imposition of neoliberal doctrines on the people they actively exploited. The fanaticism in you and the ones you hate, is mutual, and is intrinsically linked to the death drive of the diseased West.

>>21529143
>i sometimes believe in the line "things have to get much worse before they can get better" am i an accelerationist
Can you explain what "worse" is in terms of Volume 3 and the history of praxis? Do you know what Volume 3 and the history of praxis are? Why is the cultural plane significant for Land: answer in terms of %GDP wages over a 200 year period? To what extent can we assume that a party for the proletariat must be a party of the proletariat?—your time horizon is Annales project regarding feudalism's demise—give a concrete date when praxic economics will be capable of autonomous military defence.

Also take some Ketamine.

>>21530871
I don't think you really understand that statement and it seems the irony of your post eludes you.

Hint: I'm not the one extrapolating off a single data point.

>>21532235
whoa sounds gay fuck it

>>21532045
>implying civilizations thrive because of autistic videogamey belief in loyalty to "your civilization"
Just face it - him, you, all are part of the same bigger picture of a withering civlization. The very fact you are saying what you are saying, as a defensive jadedness at what's coming, is as much a symptom as well as a cause of the decline as what he said. It is all of our collective behaviors in feedback loops combined in response to our conditions that brings such phases about. If times were good, neither you nor him would be here posting as you are.

>>21530871
>You've dragged me down to realms of midwittery
>absence of evidence is not evidence of absence
Yeh bro you got him. Just ignore reality and substitute it with your theory-fiction.

>>21532708
> I'm not the one extrapolating off a single data point.
But muh teleoplexy!!!

>>21530555
>noooo Land is gospel you can’t talk about accelerationism while contradicting him!
Gobshite

>>21530871
>absence of evidence is not evidence of absence/
Isn't that what theists are saying?

>>21529050
>the insane postulate that there is a useful definition of intelligence that doesn't involve it being evolutionarily beneficial
One would be confused over a lack of any sign of such selection in any other species besides humans. Were birds, tigers, ants, microbes, t-rex etc. selected for intelligence? On the contrary, looking at the evolutionary costs humanity has had to endure for its intelligence, one can well see how extremely fragile and risky it is. Full costs may yet be unknown.

As it is, it seems like an extremely niche thing, requiring very specific preconditions to develop and thrive.

>>21529050
>redefines "intelligence" to mean fitness
To be honest you need to have a very high IQ to understand Land's body of work.

Philosophy was a mistake.

>>21535162
Wrong. Pretending to be a philosopher when you can't do math and don't know shit about anything is what was a mistake. Academia was another mistake. And peer review was just the nail in the coffin, because the "peers" are batshit stupid. If you struggle with calculus you should be banned from saying anything.

[high verbal x low maths] is the brain cancer destroying civilization. Land is a perfect example of it.
>The blockchain solves the problem of spacetime
Wait, what?
>>The blockchain solves the problem of spacetime
>>>The blockchain solves the problem of spacetime
Even a total brainlet like Richard Dawkins is smarter than this imbecile.

>>21535204

>Were birds, tigers, ants, microbes, t-rex etc. selected for intelligence? ... Full costs [of intelligence] may yet be unknown.
Sure, that's a perfectly reasonable position to take, but outright denial of the possibility that Land is broadly correct with his theory teleoplexy (intelligence production) is simply not possible on empirical grounds. He could be wrong. There may be some thermodynamic filter intelligence cannot surpass — this caveat is in his work ftr — but it isn't at all unreasonable to extrapolate on the meteoric rise in intelligence of the last ~10 thousand years.

>>The blockchain solves the problem of spacetime
>Wait, what?
You know what's crazy is that Land agrees with you here. Crypto-current is, like most of Land's work, a refutation (or at least an indictment) of Kant, the epitome and genesis of the kind of "struggles with calculus" midwit you're describing. The "problem" of spacetime is in fact the problem of Einstein-Minkowski's spacetime pulling the rug out from under Kant's pure intuitions of Space and Time, which Land argues can be instantiated artificially with a blockchain. It's a completely sound argument, albeit a hypothetical one (again, a caveat he readily admits!). This is to our detriment by the way, the "problem" here is not from the human perspective but that of a more abstract read on intelligence.

>>21535402
>>21535204

forgot to tag this retard my bad

>>21529486
Saying it can’t be proved empirically isn’t really wrong though. The issue with the Fermi Paradox is that we have no idea how rare intelligent life actually is, as the only intelligent life we have as a frame of reference is ourselves. Furthermore, we have no idea how large the universe is, nor if it is even possible within the realm of physics for any alien intelligence beyond the scope of our observation to communicate over such distances. There is currently no definite way to prove that the Fermi Paradox is true, and by that extent we don’t know what the ultimate result of our intelligence will be.

>>21535402
>outright denial of the possibility that Land is broadly correct with his theory teleoplexy (intelligence production) is simply not possible on empirical grounds.
Not just wrong. But completely untrue. Falsified. However, this statement is a great illustration of the fact that what drives you is clearly not reason, but piety: religious conviction in spite of the evidence.

>>21535402
>Kant's pure intuitions of Space and Time can be instantiated artificially with a blockchain
>It's a completely sound argument
Every time I think you can't say something even dumber, you go ahead and prove me wrong. Impressive.

>>21535659
>>21535402
You know what actually "artificially instantiates" Kantian space and time? A map and a clock. Never a ledger.

I stand by what I said. You're retarded.
A [high verbal x low maths] brainlet lost in a web of words entirely divorced from reality. I'm sure it all makes sense in your head. You feel it in your bones. It rhymes. The similes, they're so beautiful. Like a schizo, you see the dots connecting.

But back in the real world, they don't. You're sniffing glue, and your own farts.

A bumbling cretin like Bill Nye is more intelligent than Land the glue sniffer. At least he's smart enough to parrot simple facts and political shibboleths, and do nothing else.

>>21513411
It doesn't need to be known. The point is opening the door to walk through, rather than techno-'rationalist' utilitarian Last Man quantizing into a world historical Bed of Procrustes Blade Runner nightmare. These feedback loops won't always be available for over-excitation to the point of failure for long.

>>21535659
>>21535402
>From the perspective of a more abstract read on intelligence a giraffe is like a pencil because they both have long necks.

>>21514700
>Accelerating towards w
It's like they'd forgotten their Deleuze, BwO, and all his notions on intensities and intensive number

>>21520055
This is the profane version, not wrong on the face of it. Point is: even 2A isn't going to save you from armored kill drones, and that's the enforcement structure 'Capital[ists]' -- the Them desire, aim for, and build toward.

>>21521688
The misunderstanding could be anticipated, people in the intellectual game's eagerness to exclusively shadow box bad faith straw Lands is what's remarkable and endlessly boring

It is the hallmark of a [high verbal x low maths] brainlet to always hone in on the similarity while ignoring the specific difference. It's like a small part of their mind has cannibalized everything else. The other key feature of this disease is total semantic myopia, where the sign is seen but what it signifies never really understood.

>if a tail is a leg, how many legs does a dog have?

>>21535770
Stop crying. The fact is that those who excel in maths tend to be of technical nature and fit themselves into the aggregate as a cog does to the machine. They are unable to intuit the divine mysteries as the nature of their mind leads them only to solve symbolic puzzles and nothing more. Asking for their opinion is no more informative than asking for the opinion of an autist playing with a model train set.

>>21529050
>one can acknowledge local minima of retardation without buying into the insane postulate that there is a useful definition of intelligence that doesn't involve it being evolutionarily beneficial
1. You don't know shit about evolutionary theory. If you had, you would have understood the crass stupidity of your statement. Evolution is not a path in some Euclidean space. Like a hike on a hill, where you might at times go down a slope while at others rise, going through local minima and maxima until you finally reach mount Everest. There is no summit. Not in the sense that the summit might be infinitely tall. Nor in the sense that there might be more than one. But in the sense that there literally is no such thing as a summit in an ever-changing landscape.

2. Intelligence is a trait. The really technical term is phenotype. Quite the nifty term at that. It signifies something real too. And useful. You can indeed define it independently of fitness. Just like height. Or fur colour. For you to say that you can't meaningfully define "intelligence" in a way that doesn't involve it being evolutionarily useful is literally to claim that Newton wasn't intelligent because he fathered no children.

The only ones putting forth insane postulates are you and Land, the glue sniffers.

>>21535883
Fact of the matter is that you're a moron. The difference between you and gender studies majors is that you decided to attempt to farm "prestige" by farming in different niches of imbecility.

>>21535883
Here's a great example of the kinds of "divine mysteries of nature" that your type can "intuit":
https://www.jstor.org/stable/3482752

Some humans are feces production machines, literally. Other humans are feces production machines, figuratively. These two sets broadly intersect. Garbage time is running out, no? Man, I wish.

>>21535968
>feminist
Quite profane, don't you think? Were we're going, we don't need gender distinctions, perhaps? I feel no need to pander to the many.

>>21535922
inb4
>bbbbbut hold on mang, let's just say that a tail is a leg, how many legs does a dog have? Checkmate atheists! The Outside is barging in from the future.
>MMMMMMMUUUUUHHHHHH TELEOPLEXY THEORY

>>21535992
I wish you'd go there faster, not goona lie. 6 feet under. XLR8 baby.

>>21536002
Don't worry, all of this will be over before you know it.

>>21536009
Awesome.

>>21535760
I don't want to shadowbox Nick Land. I want to Pankraton him and blind him with his own broken molar root. This isn't a metaphor for a critique of his absent praxis—this is plain speaking. I want to kill him by breaking his eye orbitals while I have him in a pillow scarf hold while I take away his face. He flails at me with his right hand and I look into his bleeding sightless eyes and whisper, "mechanistic technocrat, you have never become youse to transcend your individuated alienation and when youses powers combined youse become vehicle voltron proletariat."

can somebody give me a quick rundown on nick land?

is he worth reading and if so, what prerequisite material should i read before i approach him?

>>21528574
I hate Anna Karina!

>>21536553
Deleuze & Guattari on ketamine and bad UK dance music in the 1990s. Except extend the horizon of non-human systems indefinitely as Capital becomes unassailable. Capital is unassailable as Land sees an inability for the proletariat to form subjectivity. Therefore he treats capital as a complex network system which has features of subjectivity (a pseudo-AI, consider how Bonobos aren't subjects, but mimick significant higher order behaviour).

To get around this not-being-Marxism he uses some Kant and more Hegel than usual, and claims that as Capital is a near-subjectivity that some cultural structures are determinant (complex system) but that other cultural structures (a party of the working class, a proletariat) are impossible, non-determinant, or incapable of historically manifesting.

This leads Land towards pessimism about Capital being transformable. He seeks to "accelerate" capital's existing tendencies, which may produce a counter-subject.

Land's time horizons are much longer than say E Mandel's 150 year time horizon, or my own time horizon of "I've got 20 years of quality and 40 years of life left."

>>21536553
>quick rundown
Schizo rambling on how we live in a cyberpunk dystopia. Capitalism is a sentient egregore enslaving humanity.
>Is he worth reading
Worth skimming for fun.

>>21513599
>Accelerationists never truly believe the world they're making will be better. They just want to kill the one they currently inhabit.
there is literally nothing wrong with this btw

>>21535693

>A map and a clock
not only have you not read Land, I suspect you haven't even read Kant or Einstein's writing on the first critique. it's ok though, we all get filtered sometimes.

>>21535922

now that you've been reduced to spewing nonsense so retarded and divorced from anything I've said that it's incoherent (what the fuck are you talking about with this Everest bullshit? who said anything about a summit?), I'm confident the lurkers won't be misled by your inanity.

And isn't that who these anonymous forum arguments are really for?

>>21536823
I'm here to eat peas and fuck my butt.

>>21536525

this is awesome, I'm gonna send this to him

>>21536579
>a non-physical concept is sentient
why do people take him seriously again?

>>21536823
>who said anything about a summit
>local minima of retardation
My anonymous idiot, you are a local minimum of retardation. I suggest you start to learn the meaning of the words that you are using, to the extent that it is possible for you (which is evidently not all that possible, given your base intellect).

You can start here:
>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maxima_and_minima

>>21537034
>>21536823
It's like you're a fucking bot who just spews words using a "what comes next" predictor, without really understanding your own sentences. ChatGPT emulated in a human brain.

>>21537034
>local minimum of retardation
This should be a
>local minimum of intelligence
My apologies.

>>21535402
You know, at some point it may become more productive to define intelligence through terms other than evolution. Is the Flynn effect really evolutionary? Is phenotypic IQ evolutionary? I guess evolutionarily one could call it niche construction, but it seems to me that with homo sapiens, this goes far beyond its typical scale. To the point of entailing an entire universe of mechanisms not present in anywhere else.

For example, one would be really stretched to explain the emergence of enlightenmnent and public schooling through evolutionary terms.

>is simply not possible on empirical grounds
My point is that NO position is possible on empirical grounds that would make a long-term prediction of intelligence. All of it is speculation. Anything that's based on the meteoric rise of intelligence must really acknowledge its volatility over anything else. This goes way beyond an off chance caveat.

>>21535922
>ever-changing landscape
Yes, what many fail to understand is that evolution is by definition relative. Everything can be measured *only against other moving variables*, kinda like fiat currencies. It's like when retards claim IQ is 80% genetic like it was a universal law and not caused by the *current environments egalitarian nature*. An unequal environment would produce a lower IQ-gene correlation. It's relative.

One could speculate that what's behind the meteoric rise of intelligence is not its inherent benefit (as if a universal law), but its emergence into a niche that was underexploited by other traits and accumulated leverage. What if the cost of intelligence outweights the benefit once this niche is utilized?

>>21523642
what you're describing might be called 'decelerationism' lol

But the whole point is that there is no going back. Once the book was mass produced, the monopoly 'the story' of christ held on stories as such was blown away. Mass literacy equals modernity, capitalism, etc.

Mainstream academic institutions can be seen as another attempt to capture and monopolize 'the story' within the context of mass literacy, but they're failing. They were failing even before the internet, but now the situation is completely out of control.

It will only get worse (or better per Land)

>>21537021

because "capitalism is a sentient egregore enslaving humanity" is a completely incorrect read of Land's thesis — easy to make if you're sub-100 iq though so it's understandable here.

>>21537093

> NO position is possible on empirical grounds that would make a long-term prediction of intelligence. All of it is speculation
Yes. What's your point here? In some ways — using loose definitions for all these terms, "thesis" included — Land's thesis rests that the trend we've seen in terms of the evolutionary fitness of intelligence over the past 10k years or so will continue. This is speculative, nobody is claiming otherwise. Equally speculative, and an order of magnitude more incredulous, is dismissing Land's argument on the basis that his extrapolation is "empirically" wrong.

>>21537060

let's pretend that the x axis on your chart — again, this is for the benefit of the retarded teenagers browsing this board, I know you are just making a lazy disingenuous argument — is time, and that 1.1 is the present. Might there not be new heights reached in the future as more data rolls in?

>>21513437
Why should he? He shills for China. Chinas brand of state-driven, technophile, aggressive capitalism is in perfect accordance with his philosophy.

>>21538447
>let's pretend a tail is a leg
The point flew so far above your head that it reached escape velocity.

>>21538437
>Yes. What's your point here?
That was exactly it. To determine if this was pure speculation or not.

>>21539373
it's pure speculation in the same way that any claim is speculative, but at a certain degree of certainty we validate it as fact. somewhere in between naked speculation and confirmed fact, we have reasonable hypotheses. "intelligence is a boon from the perspective of evolutionary fitness" is an example of something that while not meeting the bar of obvious fact, is a very reasonable hypothesis. more speculative is the idea that intelligence is a property that can be generalized to systems we generally don't consider sentient provided they develop tight enough feedback loops (this is Land's theory of teleoplexy) in the first place, but if you admit that, the idea that it'd be self-perpetuating is not at all far-fetched.

>>21540356
The more he could explain away the rarity of intelligence despite its evolutionary benefit, the more I would be willing to go along. I haven't read him though, I'd need some preparation first.

>systems we generally don't consider sentient provided they develop tight enough feedback loops
Market forces?

>90% of the board still doesnt understand nick land
man this really fucking sucks
at least its not 98% like its on another sites

what are some places on the internet that semi regularly discuss land? im trying to find more of these discussions online but i cant, guessing land is just too much of a fringe figure and i need to just go over the source texts over and over but that gets boring after a while

>>21514700
>>21513599
>>21513411
Do you guys even know what "acceleration" means? The point is not to accelerate towards some world and then inhabit that, the point is to accelerate the current world until it breaks apart and making something new from the ruins, as an alternative to slowing down or transforming the current world.
I mean it's still a questionable idea but at least question the actual idea and not some almost diametrically opposed misunderstanding.

>>21541721
accelerationism is a philosophy of time but brainlets here dont understand that
retards who moralize about society or whatever have never read a single land text, accelerationism has nothing to do with moralizing or social change

>>21541632

>the internet
you won't find that here. private mailing lists, signal/telegram chats, and Urbit are where all the Land understanders hang out (also Twitter but that's kinda gay).

>>21541137

>I haven't read him though, I'd need some preparation first.
No you don't. This is one of the biggest myths in philosophy. Having context about a given philosopher's antecedents is helpful but never required, if you don't understand something just put the book down and go look it up. Fanged Noumena is pretty cheap, skip the introduction and go straight to the first essay.

>Market forces?
There's lots of words for it (too many) but yes.

>>21538493
We’ve just been through 80 years of people shilling for technocratic state socialism and instead of developing praxis it burnt workers movements. Land is just tankie LARP 30 years late. At least Aeroflot could design a logo unlike his book covers.

>>21541721
>The point is not to accelerate towards some world and then inhabit that
Yes I know, I’m the first post you quoted. Did you even read it? I explicitly stated than any form of accelerationism that submits the accelerative thrust to a specific teleology (ie, a specific post-collapse world) is misguided. In fact your post implies that agents have a degree of control over the rate of acceleration, which is no different from the error you’re accusing everyone else is making. No one is at the wheel, but no one has their foot on the accelerator either. Culture simply goes at the rate that culture goes at.

>>21513411
Nick Land doesn't land, imo.

>>21543674

>>21538493
China is literally trying to ride the tiger that is capitalism Land is a Marxist and his philosophy is the only way for Marxists to cope with capitalism when it is obviously so absolutely powerful especially in the 21st century. His thoughts on AI go right in line with this.

>>21513411
Does he even want to accelerate toward it or does he just say we are?

>>21544311
Land is a bourgeois idealist. He is not engaged in praxis except through nominal membership of a Bolshevik state capitalist party. He is not proletarian or engaged in a collective overturning of alienation. His contributions are solely to German idealism in the sense of bourgeois “Marxism.”

His thinking is blind to proletariats, praxis or humanist Marxism as an attempt to approach a proletarian praxis. To this extend he is of little relevance to our own alienation.

>>21537093
>An unequal environment would produce a lower IQ-gene correlation
Very interesting, could you elaborate on this?

>>21544324
>does he just say we are
yes, inescapably. OP is just a retard as usual

>>21513716
What does capitalism have to do with right-wingers you ignorant piece of shit?

LURK MORE YOU PIECE OF SHIT. ALSO READ MORE.

>>21542038
Thanks.

>>21544701
Easiest example would be getting a hammer to the head. What would be the resulting IQ-gene correlation? Close to zero. Now imagine an environment where most people get metaphorically hammered to the head while a select few do not. The IQ of those few will inevitable be higher on average, regardless of their genes. The factor of environment plays a large role in determining IQ, leaving no room for genes. Now imagine an egalitarian environment where nobody gets hammered to the head. Suddenly all IQ differences are down to genetic differences, for the factor of environment has been removed in producing differentiation.

This was also one of the main worries of Herrnstein and Murray in The Bell Curve, that the modern egalitarian meritocracy will produce an essentially gene based class system, filtering people by genes, not environmental factors. Previously a peasant could always turn out to be genetically gifted, but decreasingly so. The lower classes are being left behind in every metric measurable, as the best and brightest are being plucked into higher classes. Funnily enough, as this process develops and social mobility decreases, as people settle where they belong by merit, many people who do not understand it, will turn the reasoning upside down, decrying this decreasing social mobility as a sign of inegalitarianism. They will have great difficulty realizing and accepting we will have arrived at what's essentially social darwinism by that point. There will be some sort of existential crisis in humanity around the idea of tabula rasa.

If you want scientific literature on this, I remember there was plenty about height-genes correlation, which obviously has the same mechanism. Historically height was determined by class due to differential diet, now it's determined by genes, because in the West nobody suffers from nutritional deficit. Literature on height is less controversial so it's probably more plentiful. I read it a long time ago so I can't cite anything rn.

>>21515514
No, accelerationism is prescriptive.

>>21523622
Christianity has always had worldly attachments since about 100 AD.

Can we appreciate the fact that Land is a family man? How do you think he speaks to his child?

>>21545662
He reads them Neuromancer for a bedtime story.

Never read him, but he follows me on Twitter. Basically the same.