They would BURN.

The Imperium loses its shit over everything. EVERYTHING. There'd be so much horrible civilian torture rape an genocide that you'd actually feel bad for the Prime Directive following spess commies. HUMANITY FUCK YEAR

*then again, maybe not

Given that most of the races can successfully interbreed with humans, they're technically just mutants with delusions of grandeur.

>>14021364
Oh shit, good save.

huh... Rogue Trader game with a bunch of different planets with homogenous mutant types. hmmm

>>14021344

Picard: Open hailing frequencies
Commissar: Ah, greetings. So good to see another Human in this part of space.
Picard: Hello, I am Captain Jean Luc Picard of the-
Comissar: Is that....is that a xeno at your tactical stations?
Picard: Ah yes, Mr. Worf is a valued member of-
Comissar: HERESY! YOU AND YOUR WORLD WILL BURN FOR THIS, PICARD!
Picard: What? Be reasonable, I'm sure we can-
Troi: Captain, I'm sensing much hostility from this man.
Picard rolls his eyes
Comissar: AND A PSYKER?! UNRESTRAINED?! DOUBLE HERESY! FOR THE EMPEROR OF MAN I HEREBY CONDEMN YOU AND YOUR CREW!

and then the USS Enterprise got hit the perils of the warp. Worf immediately became an avatar of Khorne and single handedly destroyed both ships.

Two civilizations are completely incompatible.

UFP wants a peaceful coexistence with everyone else.
IoM wants utter destruction of everyone except them.

Despite both being humans, neither side would accept the other's PoV, ever.

>>14021423

Are you implying the Imperium would talk to a ship of unknown make BEFORE blowing it up? I think you underestimate their xenophobia. If you invent a new toaster in the Imperium, you're executed because it doesn't look like the old toaster.

Both function in very different universes in which circumstances forces them to be what they are. If they did meet, they'd both understand what forces would be at work that make them different from each other, but that still would not mean they would ever accept each other, unless forced to live under the same circumstances/universe as one of the two. Because then it is simply a matter of time before pragmatism wins out. Don't be fooled by their either their idealogical propaganda, both entities are endlessly pragmatic.

>>14021364
Given that most humanoid races in Star Trek were crated by their version of the old ones technically most races in ST are the versions of the same race, or at least a decent portion. I suppose in a fit of uncharacteristic rationality the IoM MIGHT declare human compatible races that can PROVE they were Co-Created with humanity as Abhumans of some sort.

Hey, why hasn't anyone shown this information to Marcus Flavius? Are they just afraid to?

>>14021423
>Worf immediately became an avatar of Khorne
>Marneus Calgar
>Suddenly everything made sense

>>14021424
Entirely compatible, Imperium goes first, Federation peaces with whatever's left.

Do you accept the God Emperor as your one true Lord and Saviour? And will you hand over your children for military service, your resources for weapons and remaining manpower for our factories?

Umm....

You have been declared Hereticus Extremis and will be purged.


Seriously, the Imperium would virus bomb a planet because they depict the Emperor in a party hat in all their temples and they consider it heresy. If they met anyone who would not immediately bow down and accept the Imperial Creed would be shot. The Xeno acceptance is just another nail in the coffin.

http://1d4chan.org/wiki/Marcius_Flavius
Let me just drop this off here.

Fuck there's a wonderful fan crossover that deals with this, hasn't been updated in years though.

It's essentially that Star Trek is Golden Age/ Pre-Golden Age man, and a SM BattleBarge is lolwarped back in time.

Captain Picard is invited on deck and the chapter does a "present arms" routine. Suitable awe. Then suitable dismay at the state of the ship. And the servitors.

It's wonderful.

>>14021454
Are.. are you suggesting that humanity was created by anything or any other than the divine god-emperor of man?

>>14021454
>Given that most humanoid races in Star Trek were crated by their version of the old ones

what

never heard of this before

source please

genuinely interested

The federation would beat the crap out of the imperium. Better technology level, better ships, and better tactics.

>>14021440

Well to be fair, the wiring on that new toaster was positioned at slightly different angles and thus those toasters became conduits for daemons.

>>14021490
Link?

>>14021454
>tell Battle Brother Flavius that the men aboard the Enterprise were created by filthy Xenos, while standing aboard the same ship
>GREAT PLAN?

>>14021424
I wouldn't say that is entirely true. The Federation could arguably accept the IoM in the same way they have accepted the Klingons, the Cardassians or the Romulans.

The only real difference is that whereas those empires couldn't attack the Federation due to the relative difference in strength, the IoM would break out the mass drivers and steamroll everything.

>>14021320

Responding to the OP, haven't read the rest of the thread.

The Federation would probably be destroyed, even if the pre-Heresy Imperium encountered it. At the very least the Federation would be asked to cut their ties with the aliens and possibly wage open war on them (backed by the Imperium, of course). When the Federation refused (and they WOULD refuse), the Imperium would be left with "no choice" but to destroy them utterly.

That's with regards to pre-Heresy Imperium, anyway. "Modern" Imperium would not have nearly so much empathy, and would destroy the Federation, their allies and their enemies on sight.

>>14021493
One of the Next Generation episodes went into how each of the main species in star trek were created by a precursor species, oddly enough I think the Ferengi are the only species that evolved on their own. I don't remember the episode name.

>>14021493
>>14021549
http://memory-alpha.org/wiki/The_Chase_%28episode%29

>>14021549
>most xenos declared abhumans
>Ferengi exterminated

andnothingofvaluewaslost.jpg

>>14021549
http://memory-alpha.org/wiki/The_Chase_%28episode%29

>>14021525
Can't remember it, sadly.

>>14021533
How would the federation lose. Would they be defeated by the giant menchildren with projectile weapons, the ships that can't enter "subspace" without a 50% chance of getting horribly lost, or by the teleporters that require a virgin sacrifice to not end up killing the users.

The IoM is a joke.

>>14021549
>>14021493
http://memory-alpha.org/wiki/The_Chase_%28episode%29

>>14021613
The Federation isn't geared for war, projectile weaponry is effective against the Borg which your Federation has trouble dealing with, and Pyskers will ruin anyone's day.

>>14021613

The giant ships that appear out of fuckin' magic and blow up planets are kinda a downer.

>>14021613

Now, I know you're probably trolling but... Well, none of the above.

Exterminatus, Exterminatus everywhere.

Oh, and let's not pretend an Astartes wouldn't grind the average Federation cadet into a bloody pulp.

>>14021643
>>14021649

Exterminatusmind

>>14021639
The federation dealt with the borg, they are gone, and they did it without castrating the population of a planet to make supertard marines. They have mastered energy weapons that would disintegrate anything the IoM throws at them.

There's also the fact that the average Federation spaceship holds, what, a crew of a couple hundred at most?

The smallest spaceships of the Imperium is about 25,000 or such, if I'm not mistaken.

Did you think they had those ramming prows for nothing?

>>14021613
By the Federation having comparatively limited manpower and an in-canon dislike for armed forces.

Oh, you mean in ways that insult the other's canon in order to make the preferred setting seem superior? By the Federation having crappy shields that break every chance they get, terrible weapons, no military to speak of, and a severe phlebutonium addiction.

>>14021675
Look the phasers are as powerful and as weak as the episode calls for, it's been established that there is contradictory evidence of how powerful phasers really are.

>>14021423
you're spot on except for the part where picard wins via the picard maneuver.

in fact picard will just picard maneuver the imperium into submission.

check and mate warhammer friends.

>>14021613
The chances of being lost are about .001%
If it was 50%, the Imperium would be dead.

>>14021675
>the borg
>they're gone

At first, I thought you were just some Trekkie that was genuinely arguing that the Federation was stronger, because there are some merits to the argument overall, such as "How would the Imperium deal with phasers, or shields that long-since rendered projectile weapons ineffective in the Star Trek universe?".

But then I realized that you don't actually know jack shit about either side and just want to troll.

Phasers come in a wide range of sizes, ranging from hand-held versions to starship-mounted ones. Personal phasers can be made small enough to fit in the user's palm and still be deadly. Larger and more powerful phaser rifles are commonly issued to security personnel. Phaser beams can be adjusted in both width and output. A typical hand phaser can merely stun a target or completely disintegrate it, and the beam can be adjusted to strike multiple targets at once or evenly destroy large portions of material. A starship's phasers can be used as an 'anti-missile' defense, using multi-aim to destroy incoming projectiles.[8] They can be used as welding torches or cutting tools, and can create heat sources by firing at a large, solid object (like a rock). Phasers can be set to overload, whereby they build up a force-chamber explosion by continuously generating energy without releasing it; the resulting blast can destroy most natural objects within a 50-yard radius. This process is marked by a distinctive sound that increases in volume and frequency until it is deactivated or it detonates. Ship-mounted phasers have a similar range of functions on a larger scale: The phasers on the USS Enterprise could stun entire city blocks full of people[9] and even destroy entire asteroids up to a given size.

Now compare to bolter or lasgun...lots of dead marines and guards

Gents, gents, this has all be done before, and in much better form.

Marcius Flavius is a great example of what happens when the Federation and the Imperium interact.

>>14021713
ROTATE PHASER FREQUENCIES AT MAXIMUM STUN, DISPERSAL PATTERN!

>>14021613
>Would they be defeated by the giant menchildren with projectile weapons
If they got into ground warfare? Yes.

>the ships that can't enter "subspace" without a 50% chance of getting horribly lost
Warp travel is rather reliable. It only very rarely does weird stuff like send ships back in time.

>by the teleporters that require a virgin sacrifice to not end up killing the users.
LOLWAT? Seriously, IoM teleporters are basically like the Star Trek ones.

But seriously, the average Battle Barge has numerous methods of destroying planets on it. It would curb stomp and Star Trek vessel that got in its way.

>>14021713
"Space Magic".
Imperium wins. Good game.

>>14021745
What does that even MEAN?

>>14021713
Lots of dead marines and guardsman is pretty normal, actually. The Imperium has the resources to make up for it. Starfleet, canonically, does not.

>>14021752
The Federation is not unfamiliar with magic, hell look at the Q. One Q could wipe out the entire IoM for giggles, and Picard had to deal with his shit knowing a miss step could mean the end of his species.

>>14021713
>Now compare to bolter or lasgun...lots of dead marines and guards
I would much rather the commited pacifists from the Federation try and stun me rather than get sprayed by the fully automatic rocket launcher than a SM carries.

And the Federation has extremely crappy shields. Void shields seem to be vastly superior.

>>14021789
>One Q could wipe out the entire IoM for giggles
Tzeentch would be frustrating his attempts to do anything and Slaanesh would be constantly molesting him if he had the extreme misfortune of entering the 40k galaxy.

>>14021789

Picard talked his way and reasoned his way through his Q encounters.

>Implying you can reason with the Imperium

>>14021789
Yes, but Q isn't really malevolent in this context. The Imperium is. Likewise, Q isn't on the side of the Federation. It's not on the side of anyone.

So, yeah, Q is basically Star Trek Space Magic, but on the other hand, it is also irrelevant to the argument.

>>14021790
I don't get where people are coming up with this fun and peace loving version of the Federation. Every time the Federation comes into contact with an honest threat to their existence, they pull out all the stops. The Federation used biological warfare on the Dominion in an attempt to just wipe out the species as a whole.

>>14021830
babbys first exterminatus?

>>14021830
Which is what the Inquisition does when it feels bored. Virus bombing? How droll. The Imperium has developed at least a dozen different ways to destroy a world, depending on degree of re-establishment you want.

This is one of those Goku vs. Superman kind of debates. They are two entirely different things that were never meant to interact and will never interact. If a star trek fan were to write the outcome then the captain in the counter would just babble some incomprehensible plan, some idiot would use an overly simple way of explaining it, then some tech guy would reprogram something offscreen to get whatever desired one shot effects.
If a IoM fan wrote the encounter, the brave astartes would dash the xenos loving humans and rape Diana Troi with their withered genitals, while lovingly cupping the emperor's balls.

>>14021862
They literally are so advanced at virus bombing that they could, say, wipe out all red-haired men on a planet while leaving everyone else untouched.

>>14021830
>The Federation used biological warfare on the Dominion in an attempt to just wipe out the species as a whole.
Wow. That's hard core, man.
Hell, if they do that a few more million times they will be allowed to join the big leagues and be as hard core as the Imperium of Man.
Your average Battle Barge has driven multiple species to extinction in its service life. It has also wiped out countless human worlds for reasons we would find trivial.
The Federation just can't operate on these levels of grim darkness.

>>14021903
To be fair, nobody likes Deanna Troi.

>>14021903
> If a IoM fan wrote the encounter, the brave astartes would dash the xenos loving humans and rape Diana Troi with their withered genitals, while lovingly cupping the emperor's balls.

I rather doubt he'd write it that way... More Implied homosex, less overtly so. More gratuitous chainsword action, to.

>>14021903
Not really. I think that in this case the IoM is vastly superior.
The Emperor have mercy on any Federation ship that goes up against a Battle Barge that has Grey Knights on it. They'll fling themselves into the Warp and then appear on the Federation ship's bridge or engine room. That's how they roll.

>think Federation are peace-loving hippies
>never watched DS9

>>14021959
Compared to the 'PURGE. BURN. KILL." of the Imperium?
Yes. They are peace loving hippies to the extreme.

>>14021941
See and here is a perfect example of the reply to that and why nothing will ever resolve this debate.

Captain: It appears the enemy is somehow teleporting onto our ship.
Engineer: Captain we can remodulate the ion dampners to overload all the replicators and flood the decks with anti-gravitonic particles.
Plucky Ensign: Like putting too much syrup on a pancake!
Engineer: Exactly!
Captain: Make it so.

And then all the bad guys went away.

>>14021830
That's not true, though. Section 31 did that on their own accord and while it's arguable that they are a part of the Federation, they are not representative of the Federation as a whole.

The only warship the Federation has ever had was the Defiant-class starships - and they only pulled those out when faced with imminent destruction from the Borg.

The overwhelmingly vast majority of ships in the Federation fleet are science and exploration vessels.

>>14021941

The Imperium of Man's greatest weakness is their bureaucracy, coupled with their unreliable communication and travel. I know nothing about Star Trek, but here's how I imagine an encounter with the Federation would play out:

Explorator team sets down on Federation controlled planet/contacts Federation ship. After a short time, realizes, holy shit, this place isn't getting constantly raped by everything that exists. They go native.

Seven hundred years later, some bean counter on Terra realizes that at one point that Explorator team existed, makes a check mark on some paperwork which is then shuffled around for another few hundred years, and is then lost. Nobody gives a shit, because of the aforementioned getting raped by everything in existence.

>>14021987

And then the battlebarge hoisted it's sails, blew to quarters, and firing of broadside after broadside headed for the enemy vessel at ramming speed, boarding parties at the ready with grapple hook and cutlass.

>>14021959
What are you talking about? I watched -all- of DS9 just a few months ago, around Christmas, and -all- I saw was peace-loving hippies.

>>14021987
Technobabble vs the Warp, who wins?
My vote is on Warp.
When a Grey Knight flings himself into Hell so that he may reappear elsewhere as he pleases, there isn't any technological device that'll save you.
But yeah, I'm sure ST fanboys would find some nonsense technobabble excuse to allow the Federation to block out Warp dickery.

On the bright side, that one goddamn episode would have gone so much better.
"Darmok and Gilad at Tanagra"
...
"Darmok and Gilad on the ocean?"
"Fire Cyclonic torpedoes, bring Las-lances to bear."
"Shaka, when the walls fell."

>>14022007
We can keep doing this

Captain: The enemy is launching a full out assault.
Engineer: Captain, If we re-polarize the hull to the same frequency of the dilithium matrix, we can desequence the enemies chromatonic modulators.
Plucky Ensign: Just like pouring oil on an ironing board!
Engineer: Now you got it Wesley!
Captain: Make it so.

Then the bad guys went away and cried forever.

>>14022023

This leads to an interesting question.

With the ritualisation of technology in the Imperium, would the Federation be able to understand what the hell is going on? How the damn stuff works?

I mean, there's a long ass description on how to ritually start a landraider (true, the end is pressing the rune marked on, but the fact remains).

>>14022005
>After a short time, realizes, holy shit, this place isn't getting constantly raped by everything that exists
As is true for virtually every Imperium world at almost all times.
It isn't constant grimdarkness in 40k for the average citizen. Your average person has never seen a xeno and has no idea that chaos exists. They just live as a farmer or factory worker in all likelihood.
It isn't constant brutality in 40k.

>>14022044
And then they Psykers permanently turn the piddling 100 man crew of the ship into fish.

They can literally do that.

>>14022061
And then they magically solved the problem by using the power of plot device technology. This literally has no end.

>>14022074
How can fish use technology?

Espescially fish that may or may not be being mind controlled and/or Mind raped by a psyker at the moment and is suffocating to death becuase of the lack of water?

>>14022044
>chromatonic modulators.

Damn it you guys, they took away our colours. We have to make do with just black and white now! Oh well, Emperor willing we shall proceed to board as soon as our Ram has hit home.

All men to battle stations! An extra quarter of rum for the man who brings me their flag! Mr.Higgs, another broadsde to lower their shields, if you please!

>>14022053

No, it's not. But the average factory worker isn't working 9 to 5, then going home to watch the telly with his family, living in a suburb with a nice yard, maybe trying to get that promotion so he can afford a second family car.

No, he's working 9 to 5 at a job that a monkey could complete (perhaps pulling a lever every time a light comes on), with no knowledge of WHY he is doing this, or even what his factory is producing. He has about a ten percent chance of ever improving his lot in life, based entirely on luck, not merit.

The Soviet Union wasn't 24/7 Gulags, but it was still a shithole.

>>14022087
With pluck, determination, and because its a god damn kids show.

>>14021908
so are random planets in TNG. Star Trek tech is.... inconsistent. Terribly so. TOS shows out of the way garrisons being equipped with man portable antimatter mortars capable of wrecking mountains, but then DS9 (set over a hundred years in the future) goes back to short range trench warfare with phasers... you can't really say much about Star Trek and it's military hardware, because it's NOT THE POINT of Star Trek.

>>14022061
This has happened to at least a few starfleet crewmembers. They got better. Transporters are silly like that.

>>14022092
try 5 to 9

>>14022094
Not anymore it's not.

>>14022117
Not just one dude, the whole ship, and everyone on it, even the robots and the hologram's, because reality warping Warp magic doesn't give a shit.

>>14022143
Neither do reality warping, well, warp engines.
But you just don't get it, do you? You're thinking within your universe. This is not about that. This is about people and the stories they tell, however shitty they may be. And a fact is that if you smush 40k and Star Trek together, you'll mainly get two kinds of stories: yours and these:
>>14022044
>>14021987
And neither of them are "wrong" somehow. How the hell should they be? These universes are fictional for fuck's sake.

>>14022192
And we have a winrar, finally someone gets it.

>>14022192
I'm a different guy from the first guy.

I'm just saying that 40k's ridiculous bullshit is more ridiculous bullshit then Star Treks ridiculous bullshit.

any fight between the two just comes down to bullshit, whoever can make up the most ridiculous bullshit wins, ergo, I submitted turning all the Federation officers into fish.

> they were never meant to interact, you can't compare them!
The "Apples and Oranges" arguement, really? They're both round, they're both fruits with seeds, and they both grow on trees.
Get the fuck out, i can compare whatever the fuck i want to.

WH40K: Advance knowledge, alter technology, or even improve social structure and welfare, and you die horribly at the hands of some faggot who doesn't like /want /see the need to change.

StarTrek is the opposite: Based around scientific knowledge and the attempt to discover more knowledge. Including knowledge about oneself by learning about other peoples who arn't even human.

First contact between StarTrek and WH40K? Ok, the WH40K ship will probably open fire and fucking blam the shit out of the Federation ship; destruction optional, assuming the federation ship in question can get the fuck out of there fast enough.
The next one to three encounters? The science teams in the Federation LEARN more and more about their enemy and make improvements to their technology in order to neutralize or even defeat/destroy the xenophobic human ship.

The WH40K ship? No such improvements. No such learning. They just go up to a planet, exterminatus it, and keep carving a path of destruction until the ship and everything on it die horribly. Just like everything else in WH40K does; because "retreat" is never an option in WH40K.

Note: "Retreat" mind you, is what kept the Voyager series of StarTrek going for so fucking long. Which is probably what a ST federation ship trapped in WH40K would be like; one very long Voyager series of episodes, except there would be no big-name allies, only small merc type allies.

>>14022231
If there is one thing I have learned in my life so far, then it's that humans have infinite potential for bullshit.

>>14022236 tl;dr
WH40K trapped in StarTrek: That one TNG episode where the pre-peace treaty Klingon bird of prey and crew are headed toward a federation colony not knowing the war is over... except instead of klingons they're humans, and instead of accepting the ruse of klingons on the bridge (or humans in this case) they don't fucking care and shoot things up anyways.

tl;dr WH40K in StarTrek
a short destructive run by the aggressor ending in their own destruction

StarTrek federation ship trapped in WH40K: Fucking Voyager series. except more like attempting to finding a way to leave the WH40K universe and re-enter the ST universe via SCIENCE! instead of trying to get to earth.

tl;dr StarTrek in WH40K
SCIENCE!'s their way out of the WH40K universe, because if it exists, it can be understood.

/thread

>>14022256
>SCIENCE!'s their way out of the WH40K universe, because if it exists, it can be understood.
Except Lol magic and lol warp, who make no sense, have no consistency nor logic. So no, ou can't understand them nitwit.

>>14022316
> lol magic and lol warp
0/10 pathetic
except they CAN be understood well enough by the WH40K denizens to do all the shit they do.
*someone* had to figure out how that shit worked from the start the first time, otherwise how the fuck would *anything* in WH40K exist fluff-wise?

>>14022231
well then i submit that data was turned into a robotic fish that used its great robot powers to get itself onto the battle barge, then data, being data, takes over the barge's computers and fucks up the whole ship

Gellar Fields are a product of technology.

Therefore, the Federation can out-Gellar the IoM, making Chaos and Psykers completely obsolete.

>>14022399
If they go about messing, with the warp, which they don't understand... Oh boy, this will make for some entertaining Gorn. And all humans with souls, to!

Depends on whoever leads the crusade.

It could lead to an all-out grimderpian KILL THE HERETICS war.

It could also take a more interesting turn...

Confessor Mallatine speaks to Captain Picard, and convinces him of the stance of the Emperor.

Imperium-Picard's face when Confessor Mallatine tells him the Black Templars have laid waste to the Klinglons and the Romulons.

so guys, remember that one episode of TNG, Gambit was the name, where they find the vulcan artifact that can amplify someones mind to give them the ability to kill anyone thinking aggressive, violent, or bad thoughts. in the show they defeat it by thinking good thoughts and bullshit like that, but in 40k its far too grimderp and dark the 40k humans would be so angry and aggressive and violent that one person from star trek with this device could fuck up thousands of 40k humans easily

>>14022416

This. Also, the Pylons of Cadia. There ARE ways for Science to beat the Warp, and SCIENCE! is something the Federation does very well.

>>14022454
> thinks picard would image related if the IoM ship told him they just exterminatus'd the klingons and romulans

now this is just fucking sad 0/10 troll territory for anyone who's even seen just one ST:TNG episode.
Picard and the other federation members do not delight in xenociding entire species into extinction nor would they ever. it would be akin to a Lawful Good D&D character repeatedly making several billion Chaotic Evil choices at once

Same goes the other way; there's no way someone who's lived through hundreds of years of indoctrinations, wars, battles, and genetically encoded imperative to serve humanity/emps will go against that shit in one carefully worded diplomatic statement.

>>14022486
>>14022486
oh, the hilarious difference between science and SCIENCE!

>>14022501
Science within 40k is SCIENCE!, bro.

>>14022500
Dude.

Confessors can turn alien-loving planets into maniac war-mongering alien hating planets, with just a couple speeches.

Why are you in this thread if you don't know what Confessors do?

Hell, Confessors are so good at their job, one time, they contacted a planet through radio waves, and convinced them to join the Imperium through radio contact only.

Later on, the vessels land on the planet, and the Confessors discover they actually CONVINCED A PLANET FILLED WITH XENOS OCTOPUS PEOPLE TO JOIN THE IMPERIUM.

Can you imagine the oratory power of a Confessor?

It's like taking a cleric and a bard with 30 CHA, mixing that, and adding plasma guns.

>>14022508

And SCIENCE! is magic, so everything is fucking magic.

Ain't gotta explain shit.

>>14022486
Necrons are up there with Q at "it's technolimagic, I ain't gotta explain shit".

>>14022529
Well, there you go then.

All humans within Trek are obviously nascent psykers who can warp their reality with technobabble incantations. Elder Starfleet officers have honed this ability to the point where they can swing battles in their favor just by chanting a few words that make absolutely no sense.

>>14022526
Bard player here.

Can you play Confessors in the 40k RPGs?

Because I like the sound of that.

>>14022550
Sure dude, it's pretty much in the cleric career. There is even a part of the career tree named "Confessor".

>>14022549
>>14022549
>>14022549
it all makes perfect sense now

>>14022526
> 30 CHA
there's a non-verbal element to this, there'd have to be in order to have that effect on a mass audience. NO ONE speaks that well without abusing some character fault that exists in their target that they'd have to know about in order to abuse in the first place.
never mind what happens to the one deaf guy on the crew that can't hear the speech, or the one computer hologram that doesn't have emotions to manipulate.

>>14022531
> necrons
OP chose Imperium of Man. You fucking discuss Imperium of Man. Not some fucking ancient undead metal robots powered by bullshit.

>>14022597
its the 40k universe, everything is powered by bullshit

>>14022602
Well, Bull Shit is a powerfull carbonate...

>>14022602
> its the 40k universe, everything is powered by bullshit
> everything WH40K
> bullshit-powered

> this thread

>>14022571
>>14022571
Awesome.

The only way Star Trek would win is if they were in the 40k universe, and the 40k universe was separate from theirs. Then they could create an anomaly that wiped out all life for all of their history.

>>14022597
>implying a confessor couldn't convince a foul artificial intelligence that it is a foul abomination

Off with your head.

After your superiors have been convinced of the Word of the Emperor. Of course.

Remember, Confessors are as much clerics, as skilled orators, as well as salesmen. They are the people that convince democratic planets to become a part of the Imperium for safety against xenos and pirates. They're the people that convince feral planets drenched in blood sacrifice to cut that shit out, because the Great Tyrannosaur Who Roams The Stars dislikes blood sacrifice, because it strengthens The Great Snake Who Dwells Below.

All of the species in star trek are arguably not actual xenos, but abhumans.

The capability to interbreed with them lends itself to that theory, anyway. The fact that they can peacefully coexist with them (for the most part) is another indication.

For all the rhetoric, the Imperium is remarkably tolerant of aliens - much more so than many other sci-fi factions. Especially considering their history with them.

The Imperium will still work with the Eldar, actually tolerates a degree of trade with the Tau, accepts abhumans (Squats, Ogryn, Ratlings) and if you accept old canon, even half breeds. They're willing to be diplomatic with other races that don't worship chaos and represent order, even if they don't particularly like them.

However, the one thing the Imperium absolutely respects is strength. The Imperium will try to conquer EVERYONE if they can, and respect someone's independence only if they manage to defeat a crusade and can act civil.

In this respect, Star Trek would be pretty screwed. Their firepower is in the double-digit Megaton range. 40k has firepower in the hundreds of GIGATONS range.

What does that mean? It's the difference between a firecracker and the Tsar Bomba.

Trek ships couldn't POSSIBLY damage 40k ships, but 40k ships could easily destroy every ship in 40k combined by just ramming them, and would never even notice.

Only the god-tier Trek races could save them, and if they did, the god-tier 40k creatures would get involved.

So in summary; Trek is screwed.

>>14022638
Look at me.

Now look at your gun.

It's a powerful weapon to slay the unrelenting evil in this world!

Now go forth, and SLAY!

AND THEN SUDDENLY.

>>14022682
>>14022682
nope

imagine the paint required to repaint the prow after ramming tactics. Think of the poor ship crew.

>>14022682
>All of the species in star trek are arguably not actual xenos, but abhumans.
Actually if you recall, in TNG there is an entire mini plot about how all the races were engineered by super aliens in the past. So they're all cousin species with some exceptions.

>>14022696
IN THE GRIMDARKNESS OF 40K, THE SHIP PAINTING CREW WILL NEVER SLEEP OR REST.

>>14022696
Dude, do you think the Imperial Navy cares?

THEIR VICTORIES ARE ETCHED IN THE PROWS OF THEIR SHIPS!

Even the Orks targetted the prows of Imperial vessels first, because they feared the pure killing power of Imperial prows.

>my rogue trader has lost his jaw btw, and he replaced it with a metal one. a pointy one. last game, i chin-prowed an ork warboss to death

I know only a bit of 40k lore and in fact dislike it greatly in favour of the ST continuity, which I know quite a bit about, but I have to give this to the IoM.

Numbers. Scale. Unwavering to the point of stagnation. Even if (and I'm not saying this is the case) the Federation could, would and did send every ship in the fleet at maximum warp with infinite sustainability on continuous 1-hit-kill extermination missions to successive IoM planets for a thousand years, they would fail to put a dent in it.

The federation, by contrast, has less than a thousand member planets.

This war would at best be the plucky, well-armed survivors in a defensive fortress against the endless zombie apocalypse, and at worst be a slaughter.

>>14022724
That's actually incorrect. The Imperium has too many enemies to bother pursuing forces that don't and can't really harm them, and may in fact be beneficial to leave around.

IF and I say IF the Federation defeated a crusade (which they wouldn't) the Imperium would probably just let them live and engage in trade with them. They'd switch over to long-term missionary and trade tactics, and encourage pro-Imperium government overthrows.

That said, if Trek actually used all of their devices of the week, such as genesis devices and the phase cloak technology, they'd be a close match for the culture.

They won't, however. So they're fucked.

>>14022760

You're neglecting an important note:
The Imperium has Wizards.
They're called "psykers," but just like a real Wizard, they eat phase-cloaks.

That said, both storylines are somewhat powered by 'handwavium.'
Ironically, 40k uses less of it.

>>14022760
>the culture
Fuck off. No, seriously. Fuck of, you and your silly hedonism idealizing books with no conflict or plot. Even if you'd only want to mention a powerscale, better universes are out there for that. Use Dune or something. Faggot.

Now piss off.

>>14022787
What makes you think I LIKE the culture? I hate the setting. But it IS extraordinarily powerful, and is easily one of the most powerful forces in fiction below "I'm god lol" scale.

>>14022787

I sympathize with this anger; the Culture does have a bit of leftist masturbation.

Also, no one ever asks: "What if I want to be a Mind?"
They're all happy being normal humans. All day.

>>14022787
>Fuck of, you and your silly hedonism idealizing books
>Use Dune

>>14022807

You know, a museum might actually want to purchase and display that piece.
"Modern Culture, Revamped."

>>14022807

Well, technically, based on the results of the plot and the obvious hero characters, it tends to Do Bad Things to the overt hedonists.

>>14022807
Artfags didn't get Dadaism, they wouldn't get that.

>>14022846
Andy Warhol with metallic paints?

>>14022830
Those things happen because they are treacherous people that go around dicking people over and starting wars. I can only think of one thing happening to someone because he was a hedonist. Everything else was always politics.

Given the choice, would you rather be an Imperial Guardsman, or a Space Marine?

>>14022919
I'd rather be a Guardsman.

I'd choose space marine though. Maybe.

>>14022919
Can I be a space wolf so I can have free time and keep my penis?

>>14022760
>That's actually incorrect. The Imperium has too many enemies to bother pursuing forces that don't and can't really harm them, and may in fact be beneficial to leave around.
Not really. From my meager understanding of IoM, the resources required to bring the UFP would be a single hydrogen atom in an entire galaxy of military might - they might not assign a battalion the primary task of conquering the UFP, but the UFP would be bound to get in the way of exterminating entire alien races, and then it would become a "line in the sand" situation that would not end well for the Federation.

>That said, if Trek actually used all of their devices of the week, such as genesis devices and the phase cloak technology, they'd be a close match for the culture.
You are... underestimating the Culture, even knowing what little I do about them makes me confident in this assessment.

Sorry if I sound cheeky for someone who probably isn't as familiar with 40k as you are, but when it comes to war, the Federation is toast even if they could destroy IoM planets with impunity. And they couldn't. As far as WOULD it come to war, that depends greatly on the nature of their meeting, both on a "character" level and on a "world" level.

>>14022919
SPESS MUHREEN

Who needs sex when you can fight ALL DAY LONG ON A MILLION PLANETS!

I'll BE AVITUS, AND YOU, HEAVY BOLTER, YOU WILL BE MY SASHA!

ELDAR TEAM IS BABIES

>>14022919
Guardsman. At least I get a chance at a family and a few peaceful end days, no matter how flimsy the chances.

who else thought that the prophets just letting the dominion fleet vanish was utter bullshit?

>>14022876

Don't FALL INTO THAT TRAP.
Even if an author does not cause Bad Things to happen for a specific reason, he still expresses his opinion about that character.

That Bad Things happened to the hedonists is enough.
Whatever the plotline 'reason' was.

This also comes along with a recurring theme of 'unavoidable self-sacrifice' by the hero-characters.
And as a double side note, Mr. Harkonnen was FANTASTICALLY inept in any sort of reality-based feudal politics and/or social and military strategy.

>>14022957

Spoilers: You only live FIFTEEN HOURS.
And the song begins to play.

>>14022972
>Even if an author does not cause Bad Things to happen for a specific reason, he still expresses his opinion about that character.
Well obviously, but from a realistic point of view the meta reason they died doesn't connect to their death. It's just that, the author didn't like them and wrote them to die. And has no bearing outside of dune.. which is also in different authors hands now..

Let's see if that thought makes anyone foam at the mouth.

>>14022807
There's a little more to Dune than just Hedonism and lol AI solves everything though. Not much, I'll give, but enough. There's politics.


Culture... Culture is just her derp, consequence free fucking, no moral problems, no problems or issues to be solved, the AI will do it all, now let me become a 6 year old baby and do me in the ass! herp!

>>14022919
Salamander marine.
Get a family, keep your dick, be a SPHESS MUHREEN.

What happened to the Marcius Flavius one where he gave Picard some skulls? And then 'What happened to the Romulan trade delegation?' 'Well, in a way, they're already here..' 'IN WHAT WAY?!'

Isn't on 1d4chanm

>>14022990
>mfw I become Guardsman
>mfw I'm assigned to the Lucky Thirteen
>mfw I get to attack an Iron Warriors Fortress
>mfw we're so lucky the Emperor sends an earthquake to break the walls of the Fortress
>mfw we discover billions and billions of thrones in the Fortress
>mfw I have so much money, I can buy my own planet
>mfw I'm a planetary governor
>mfw my little brother is a chapter master
>mfw my bro is a rogue trader
>mfw wu-tang clan ain't none to fuck with

>>14022997
>which is also in different authors hands now
All of my burning hate.
Kevin J. Anderson's job is to shit all over Frank Herbert's legacy.

>>14022972
> speaking of the SUBCONSCIOUS INTENT of an author
> saying "Don't FALL INTO THAT TRAP."
This, THIS is irony.

>>14023008
http://suptg.thisisnotatrueending.com/archive/13343822/
FOUND IT. BEST THREAD EVER.

>>14022972
> Mr. Harkonnen was FANTASTICALLY inept in any sort of reality-based feudal politics and/or social and military strategy.
Are you joking? He was able to get the Emperor to do his dirty work by manipulating him into thinking Leto was a threat (when he was only a threat to the Harkonnen). He had a long-term plan for subjugating Arrakis and converting it into a prosperous and loyal colony. He was highly adept at controlling his subordinates by making sure he knew their vices and using them against them (Vries and Jessica, Captain Nefud and Semuta, etc.). Hell, he destroyed all of House Atreides save for Paul in a single evening, even bring in artillery no one had ever seen before because he correctly anticipated that most of the Atreides would try to reogranise in the caves, and the artillery would just seal them in. And he was a political realist in that he knew he could never be emperor but as long as he grew close to the Emperor, it would increase the chances of his successors.
The only mistakes he made were letting Paul escape (and since Paul wouldn't have escaped if he wasn't a male Bene Gesserit which was believed completely impossible at the time) and that he underestimated the Fremen (which, again, wouldn't have been that bad if Paul hadn't become a man-god)

>>14022999
>There's a little more to Dune than just Hedonism and lol AI solves everything though. Not much, I'll give, but enough
confirmed for hasn't read any of the original Dune books

>>14023051
Basically this.
If Paul hadn't practically ascended to godhood, then Feyd Rautha would have been the next Emperor.
Vladimir Harkonen knew exactly what he was doing.

>>14023064
I read each of Frank Herbert's Dune books as it came out, and I can assure you there is more to it than HERP HEDONISM DERP AI.

>>14023070
Vlad was an able, even a master politician, but he had a very limited world view in many ways. He knew much of what he was doing, but he didn't know everything.

All the Marcius threads I could find, in chronological order. Sort of.

http://suptg.thisisnotatrueending.com/archive/10401727/
http://suptg.thisisnotatrueending.com/archive/11509495/
http://suptg.thisisnotatrueending.com/archive/11769524/
http://suptg.thisisnotatrueending.com/archive/13343822/

>>14023051
>>14023070

DON'T FALL INTO THIS TRAP:

Using 'in-universe' logic to determine the REAL effectiveness of a character's behavior.
The only reason Harkonnen's activities were effective is: The Author Made It So.
He forcibly altered the outcome of behaviors from what they would be if used in an analogus real-life situation.

It's the common case of "The heroes are idiots, but the villains are stupider."
A little experience with sociology or genuine military strategy will display Harkonnen's ineptitude, and for gloss you need look little further than his use of Thufir.

>>14023042

It was not Frank Herbert's subconscious attempt to display the 'rape' of the wilderness and 'nature' for pleasure as bad.
He directly states it multiple times.

Irregardless of that, >implying you know if it was 'subconscious.'

>>14023117
>Irregardless

I face palmed so hard I got a nose bleed.

>>14023117
what was wrong with his use of Thufir? He knew exactly what he was up to and actually hoped he would plot with Feyd against him, since he knew this would sharpen Feyd and teach him how to use a mentat as a proper tool

>>14023127

You must become very sad when you see non-standard dialects that may or may not contain double negatives.
One must wonder if there is a particular reason for using that word rather than simply "regardless."

>>14023144
You're kind of proving his point, about being aware of military strategy. You don't use captured personnel in critical capacities, no matter how well you believe you know their weaknesses.

>>14023117
"The 'rape' of the wilderness and 'nature' for pleasure" isn't really a strong theme in the works, and not really a portrait of hedonism necessarily. You will revile me and argue this into the ground, I know. I'm not trying to bullshit you or troll you, and just consider for a second that I'm possibly not a blathering idiot like you may think.

Oh, and you're right about me using the word "subconscious" wrongly, I should have said "implicit," as that's what I meant at the time.

>>14023196

Ecological exploitation is a major theme.
Coincidentally, the most exploitative are also the most hedonistic.
Double-coincidentally, manymanymany character failings in his books are due to sexual pleasure.
(Bene Gesserit conditioning, Honored Matres, Ducan Idaho addition.)
Triple-coincidentally, the most powerful fighting force in the books comes from the most sparse living conditions.

Whether it was his direct and explicit intention to convey this, or simply his own view seeping through, is... irrelevant.

Frank Herbert is a good author, notably in the areas of universe creation and technical sentence-making/descriptive skill.
His views and plotting however are somewhat obvious, and in many cases conflict with How Things Really Work.

>>14023251
I approve of hedonists suffering for their actions.

The Culture novels on the other hand, positively exalt it as a virtue.

>>14023291

Pleasure, or seeking it, is not something to disdain, however:
The method by which one pursues it is easily disdainable.

One should not sacrifice future survival for momentary pleasures.

>>14023251
Ecological exploitation is a major theme, yes, but while any sort of exploitation can be argued as pleasure-based I don't think that aspect was really stressed.

The most exploitative are also the most narrow-minded in their pleasure-seeking, maybe. Your philosophical views are structuring your characterization of elements in the book. Then again, so are mine, as I believe that all action is hedonistic in its most fundamental sense.

Pleasure is powerful =/= pleasure is evil.

And the Fremen aren't strangers to pleasure; simple pleasures are still pleasures.

I only corrected myself as a matter of integrity, not as an argument.

>>14023345
I'm talking the Sex changes for pleasure Hedonism, both parties getting pregnant and fucking while one is in a baby shape, that sort of thing.

Not so much pursuit of pleasure, as mindless self indulgence.

>>14023380
In that case, sure, Herbert's writing seems to be strongly against mindless anything... which weakens the Hedonism argument again.

I can only imagine how a away team recklessly is teleported aboard the Imperium Cruiser.... and then promptly spends the next 24 trying to survive in the decrepit hollows of the ship filled with mutants and xenos.

>>14022999
>Culture... Culture is just her derp, consequence free fucking, no moral problems, no problems or issues to be solved, the AI will do it all, now let me become a 6 year old baby and do me in the ass! herp!

>>14023492

No troll. Tell me then, what is so good about the culture.

Actually, no don't. I'm tired of this discussion before it's even started. There is too much stupid for me to endure. Forget it. yay Culture! It doesn't suck at all and has great plot and resolution!

I for one second the motion that The Culture is leftist bullshit transhumanist bullshit thinking.

And I'm saying that as a leftie. Mate.

>>14023603
Socialist Democrat here (yeah, you Americans wouldn't understand). Completely Agreed. Culture is outrageous nonsense.

>>14023626
haha yeah those americans are so dumb LOL

Culture is at least consistent in itself. There is no reason why a transhumanistic future would have same problems and solutions than the current one. It is more than likely that everything can be solved via tampering with technology.

Of course it doesn't really explore anything related real world problems and taking stuff from those books too seriously is going to make anyone look like a moron.

>>14023347

I stated none of that.
Merely that, in the books, the more exploitative characters were the more 'hedonistic.'
That is telling about the author's opinion, and the view he wishes to convey to the reader.

>>14023603

The Culture is not a society of transhumanists-- it's a society of hyper-industrialization, AI governed.
They're all still regular humans, with seemingly no motivation in life other than being stereotypically British.

>>14023603
>transhumanist bullshit thinking.
>>14023626
>yeah, you Americans wouldn't understand

So much trolling in one thread.

>>14023660
Idiot.

He's referring to the fact that Americans are unable to see Socialism free from Communism.

It's not a joke about the collective American intelligence.

But it might be a joke about YOUR PERSONAL "American" intelligence.

>>14023603
To be honest, I discover even more intellectual merit in Star Trek's post-scarcity communism than in The Culture's pedophile A.I. Big Brother Socialist hellhole.

Because The Culture basically says "You're all retards being controlled by Big Brother, and you don't even care because you're too busy getting your virtual cock jerked off by a virtual hand."

>>14023675
Transhumanism IS bullshit.

We humans have been transhuman, the moment we transcended the caveman stage.

>>14023684

You're him, and the general idea of ridicule directed at you was likely this:
You made a sweeping generalization about an entire nation of a few million individual persons.

A generalization that by virtue of its scope is almost certainly incorrect.
That makes you a bit of a tart.

>>14023696

Humorously, it may be likely that the next technologically augmented iteration of humanity says something similar, referencing now instead.
Provided they're not AIs with something more optimal to do than trivial word-mincing.

>>14023710
No I'm not.

Althrough this post
>>14023684
should link to this post
>>14023626

My bad.


And you need to LEARN about European politics, because right now, the point is flying completely over your head, which makes you a tard.

>>14023729
Nothing ever changes.

Even when things change.

>>14023710
Learn to check for samefags. I'm him. Sometimes I contemplate the sin of tripfagging, so at least retards like you get it right for once.

The sins you make contemplate Anon...

>>14023668
> I stated none of that.
No, you didn't directly - and I didn't directly state anything that you contraindicated in your post, yet post it you did. Funny how that works.

>>14023754
No you're not. Idiot.

Unless you're imitating me. In that case, good game, mate.

>>14023684
>He's referring to the fact that Americans are unable to see Socialism free from Communism.
>It's not a joke about the collective American intelligence.

You just contradicted yourself.

>But it might be a joke about YOUR PERSONAL "American" intelligence.

>he thinks I'm an American just because I'm tired of seeing retards constantly bitch and moan about America on the internet
>laughingtaugirls

>>14023744

>Makes a generalization about everyone in a part of the word.
>Justifies it by stating the other person should look up a generalization about another part of the world.

Oddly enough, there is more than one country in Europe, and thus multiple branches of 'politics.'
(There's also more than one country in "America," not that we should mention that in front of your fragile world view.)

>>14023769
You're American alright. Haven't met a civilized person who didn't enjoy the occasional bash at American society. But Europe has a lot more self deprecating society you see, we'll take the piss out of America, ourselves, and the neighbors. It's mostly joke, not heart felt hatred if you think that's what it is.

So, nah. You're an amerifag.

>>14023761
You're quite a haughty twit who's been missing his point the entire time. Just scroll up to the original discussion.

>>14023684
>Because The Culture basically says "You're all retards being controlled by Big Brother, and you don't even care because you're too busy getting your virtual cock jerked off by a virtual hand".

Isn't this what post-scarcity is all about? Who needs people when everything is done by machines?

Someone might enjoy doing sciences but would probably need serious augmentations before being able to comprehend most of the stuff that is going at that point. He would get those and if he manages to discover something new then it would be immediately spread to everyone.

And if someone would want to rule the AI would either give him his own artificial sandbox so he doesn't cause problems.

Post-scarcity is post-conflict, there is no need to do anything and if you want to do something then you will be granted opportunity to do so without bothering others.

>>14023794
Then why bother reading?

Or better, why bother living as a human?

In such a case, I'd rather be a working-class A.I. or FUCKING DEAD.

Gee, what a philosophical depth.

I discover, I'd rather be a fucking computer program or blow my brains out than being an incompetent fuck.

>>14023780
There's a big difference between enjoying the occasional bash and constantly bringing up a specific country and bashing it out of pure xenophobia and jealousy because of that country's poltiical and cultural dominance of the world.

Hell, you're just showing how warped your worldview is by claiming I am American despite my post telling the contrary simply because you cannot comprehend the idea that there might be some people out there who don't despise America.

>>14023794
And no conflict, no despair, nothing beyond a push of a button, make for really boring books.

And not particularly challenging either. The only question is "How will the AI solve it this time, and how long can the writer drag it out and fill in the rest with sex".

>>14023761

You've literally been talking about things that have no bearing on the original and active contention:
That Frank Herbert caused the 'villains' to be portrayed as hedonistic-- whether or not that hedonism caused their demise is irrelevant.
It indicates that Frank Herbert views hedonism as a 'villainous' trait.

You then stated that ecological exploitation for pleasure was not a 'major theme' in the novels, which is incorrect.
It is, and one need only look at Geidi Prime, or the Soostone harvests.

>>14023769
The American problem with seeing socialism in a proper light isn't some kind of European grudge.

It's a real societal and political problem in the USA, in my opinion.

Come on, the only difference between the Democrats and the Republicans, is that one wants gay marriage, and the other doesn't. They're all right-wingers.

>>14023771
>implying the individual European political parties don't discuss regional European topics together with their counterparts in other European countries.

As someone closely involved in the green-left political movement, I can say - fuck you.

>>14023794
The thing is that in post-scarcity, you do something not because you HAVE to, but because you LIKE to. If you enjoy cooking, you won't get your meals from the meal replicator. You'll cook, and you'll have fun doing it.

Fuck, if your passion is starship construction, you can do that. You can build actual starships. You won't build them nearly as fast as an assembler, but that's not the point - the point is being able to point at the finished product and say "I made that myself".

>>14023835
>As someone closely involved in the green-left political movement

Ah, so you're one of those.

Very well then, I'll drop this discussion. Maybe one day when you grow up we'll continue it.

>>14023835
You make so many sweeping declarations... about things you clearly have no idea about... It's disturbing.

"All Europeans talk about all European matters together, and when I say you should look at European politics I mean that everyone in Europe is all on the same page and have the same laws and are all the same."

>>14023813
Jealousy? Of 'murrica? Sorry, but that is not a reason any of the (europeans, anyway) bash you. We, with the Canadians and such ar prety much on the same tech level as you.

People bash your for your hilariously backward militant ways, incredibly superficial culture (and the fact that it's spreading everywhere, which a lot of people find a little annoying). And above all, your naivite where other countries are concerned. International policy, all that stuff.

Envy you? For what? We have everything you have, but without the high murder and crime rates, or extremely black and white government.

>>14023821
I never I said that the books are good. I commented an anon that said that post-scarcity with conflict (ie Star-Trek) portrays post-scarcity better than the "Let the machines handle it" attitude of Culture.

>>14023813
>There's a big difference between enjoying the occasional bash and constantly bringing up a specific country and bashing it out of pure xenophobia and jealousy because of that country's poltiical and cultural dominance of the world.

>implying I was bashing the USA
>implying I was referring to its political or cultural dominance

You STILL don't get my point.

You STILL don't get it.

It's a fucking CULTURAL TRANSLATION NOTE! Fuck.

>most americans have problems properly understanding democratic socialism, as it exists in political parties in europe

>OMG Y U INSULT ME COUNTRY?

Yeah, I'm done here. I'm pulling open the ad hominems now. It's fucking useless to continue this discussion anyway.

>>14023851
>often = always

How did you not fail English class?

>>14023845
No one is stopping you from doing that unless you endanger others. Just don't expect anyone giving a shit either though.

>>14023853
Haha oh wow, the amount of asspain in this post is hilarious.

Tell you what. Open your newspapers. Any of them. Daily, weekly, whatever. I'm sure you have some around.

And now go count how many articles in it talk about anything America related. Culture? Go check on how many of those "celebrity" pages and shit like that are about American movie stars and other celebrities.

USA is, whether you like it or not, both the political and the cultural world power.

Or you can go back to "LALALALA I CANT HEAR U UR DUMB AMERICUNT LALALALA", I don't particularly care, I think both mine and your posts proved my point entirely.

>>14023862

Unfortunately, Star Trek is 'post-scarcity' by virtue of Handwavium.
Thus, anything it portrays is subject to full-power implausibility.
There are no "how" explanations, so as an ideal and example, it is flawed-- it can't guide readers to achieving that state.

The Culture is technologically possible, but does run into social troubles:
Every citizen must intrinsically be limited to a defined standard; no one ever chooses to become a 'Mind,' or do anything other than be human all the time.
You can choose to build starships, but only if they're not *good* starships. (Or better than what the current AI hardcap can do.)

>>14023845
And what is the interest in reading that? Do you often read man shipbuilders autobiographies? If it's a very exceptional one who had an interesting life, I might, but a fictional entity who's only feet is "I built a ship, because I was too bored to do something else" Then... no.

Post scarcity settings make for bad storytelling places. Why'd you think Fantasy is set in middle ages esque setting, and is so bloody popular?

>>14023865
>herp derp americans are too dumb to understand my nation's complex policies
>herp derp u disagree with me so u must be american

>>14023832
>the original and active contention:
>That Frank Herbert caused the 'villains' to be portrayed as hedonistic.
Actually, the contention in question concerned whether or not Dune was a silly book that idealized Hedonism. It did not.
>It indicates that Frank Herbert views hedonism as a 'villainous' trait.
It indicates it inconclusively. Taking the concept of "author's intent" too seriously detracts from the work in my view; speak to the material and leave it at that.

>>14023880
Celebrity pages? In NEWSPAPERS? I think you must be operating under a different definition of newspaper bud. Never seen anything like that in my paper.

Oh, and things like The Sun ain't newspapers - they're tabloids.
Very few articles about America in it. Volkskrant, wednesday 24 Feb, 2011. Talks about the upcoming elections, the riots in Libya and Egypt, Marrocan immigration -again- integration, and a whole bunch of twits giving their opinions on these matters. Not one article about America, sorry mate.

America is Sort of culturally dominant. That culture is adapted rather superficially, and changed though.

>>14023832
Repeatedly talking about something to yourself does not make it the active contention, fyi.

ATTN: Culture, Imperium, Xeelee, Time Lords, Daleks, Federation, Galactic Empire.

Downstreamers were here. You are all small time.

>>14023853
Let's not get into this America versus the world stuff guys. I mean it's not like we invented the very internet you are using right now to convey your dislike of my country.

My country that bled to give Europe freedom from fascism, not once, but twice.

My country that landed on the moon.

My country that crawled it's way from a backwards, shit covered colony of all of Europe's misfits and became, arguably, the most powerful nation on the world.

My country filled with idiots and God fearing Southerners (Six in one hand...), where we have more guns then people and are more then happy to wear them in public, even at political rallies, as a sign of pride.

You see, we don't have the self-deprecating humor of Europe man, we have pride. So sometimes our pride makes us talk back to someone who hasn't lived here, talking ill about our country.

Also? France isn't here. We win.

>>14023900

I clearly indicated that it did not idealize hedonism, and in fact, and obviously, did the opposite.

The point has everything to do with the author's intent--
To refresh the idea:
An author can express a viewpoint by causing Bad Things to happen to a character.
Further, that those Bad Things need not be related to the subject of the viewpoint itself.

(Which was in response to:
>"Those things happen because they are treacherous people that go around dicking people over and starting wars. I can only think of one thing happening to someone because he was a hedonist. Everything else was always politics."
at
>>14022876)

>>14023909

I googled Downstreamers, and holy fucking shit.

>>14023912
God, what an eyeroll. I'm not any of those other people you're talking to, but you are ridiculous.

>>14023908
When someone walks into another discussion, then proceeds to change the subject, that does not change the active contention of the original discussion.

>>14023919
And now you understand Americans. Congratulations!

>>14023912
Do yo really, really want me to answer those obviously sarcastic and revisionist claims? No you don't.

Pride? What good is pride. Pride gets you killed. Pride starts wars. National pride is even worse. It gets others killed, countries destroyed and resources are destroyed. Keep your damned pride. Humility and a sense of humour have worked for us these past 70 years, We'll stick with that. Only national pride types around here are fascists and Neo-nazis. Real nice chumps.

>>14023912
>My country that ran to help Europe long after someone else did the job for us, not once, but twice.

>My country that landed on the moon once and managed to kill several people in unrelated botched shuttle missions.

>My country that crawled it's way from a backwards, shit covered colony of all of Europe's misfits and became, arguably, the most powerful shit covered nation on the world for a few decades before collapsing in on itself.

>My country filled with classist, hypocritical idiots such as myself, where we have more guns then people and fight over them out some paranoid delusions regardinf danger and safety.

>You see, we don't have the self-deprecating humor of Europe man, we have severe egotism due to relative isolation from the rest of the world. So sometimes our egotistical alpha male attitude makes us talk back to someone who hasn't lived here, criticizing our moronic commentary.

>Also? France isn't here. WE PREZ-DIN NAO.

Hurrrr.

>>14023918
>>14023909

The Emperor could defeat them.
What they don't have is MAGICAL POWERS.

>>14023936
Now THIS is butthurt.

>>14023951
Maybe he's from New England. They're as anti-American as bin Laden.

>>14023951

I dare say it is. Come chaps, let us gather a specialized team of European and American scientists and conserve this piece for further study of the "butthurt".

if /tg/ goes /int/, I go sage&hide

>>14023965
And I dance the polka, and welcome our brothers of many colours.

Then we can all bitch at the culture novel together. Them, and their haughty fans.

>>14023888
Derpity derp.

Culture's all about why utopias still suck, broseph.

I have just recently opened a gate to The Culture...

SPACE MARINES, ADVANCE!

>>14023982
Funny that, you'd think the boo called Utopia would have established that well enough, but people apparently need a lot more pressuring.

Also, no need for labour and instant gratification? That is only Utopia to a very select few people. Not to me, it isn't. It sounds fucking horrible. No real free will, no responsibility, no denial of anything I desire, no hardships... Man, that's fucking hell.

>>14023991

OH LOOK, A SELF-MORTIFICATION FETISHIST.

SLAANESH WELCOMES YOU TOO.

>>14023873
Oh, they'll give a shit.

Not everyone will, but it's a big Culture, and you can certainly find at least a FEW like-minded souls who share your shipbuilding obsession. You can join a club! Or better yet, start your own rival club!

Hell, in Look to Windward, massive amounts of people get obsessed over building pylons in the middle of a desert. There are massive votes on who gets to vote on where the pylons go.

>>14024003
No. A person who thinks a regular life with all it's hardships and failures is far more worthwhile and interesting to live than a life where nothing is denied to you, nothing surprising happens, nothing challenges you, nothing happens to cause you any distress.

What merit is there to that life? What will you have learned from it? Was it worth living? I say no. But you are free to indulge your baby rape and goatmen fantasies, if you like.

>>14023915
>I clearly indicated that it did not idealize hedonism
So we agree that the original contention was false. Then, you moved on to a new proposal, that the books in fact demonize hedonism, which you supported by referring to the various heels that meet bad ends are also hedonists. Yes, an author _can_ express a viewpoint by causing Bad Things to happen to a character or characters, creating an association between the trait and the outcome and thus imputing a moral value on the trait because of the idea of "just desserts"; this means that Frank Herbert "could" have intended the material to demonize hedonism. Not the most airtight of arguments, but that doesn't matter. If I said something to refute one of your supporting points, then what I mentioned had bearing on your position - or if not, then how could it be a supporting point?

You cannot argue a position using bad arguments, and then dismiss refutations of specific arguments as 'having no bearing on the original and active contention'.

>The point has everything to do with the author's intent--
It doesn't. A book can assign a moral value to a concept without the author sharing that opinion, and the reverse is also true; speculating about the author's "intent" muddies the issue and isn't really the point when the point is whether it, the book, does or does not idealize hedonism. Keep it separate and the work will stand on its own.

>>"Those things happen because..."
This, merely to be clear, was not my post.

>>14023991
You have more free will than in a scarcity economy. In a scarcity economy, you are restrained by what you can afford to do. Hell, some people have to endure rape (which is to say, unwanted sex) to obtain enough exchange collateral to survive. That REDUCES their free will, because if they could choose to, they would choose not to have sex with that person.

There is as much hardship as you care to endure.

>>14024016
So tell me, what is worthwhile about suffering, starvation and sickness? What is worthwhile about soul-crushing drudgery and ulcers?

And why the hell do you have this baby rape obsession? Have you considered going to a psychiatrist to have that looked at?

>>14024016
Not everyone is a Christian protestant that finds meaning in struggle.

>>14024028
My free will right now is limited by law and society.
In the Culture verse? It's limited by everything, because none of it is real. I can't go outside the ships. can't touch real trees, or breathe anything but the stale ship air. No thanks, I'll take my chances in this cold, harsh world rather then endure an eternity of false sentiments and boredom.

>>14024016
There is no meaning, you don't learn anything profound and you don't take anything with you when you go. And the existence of free will is, if not doubtful, at least limited by what kind brain you have.

With proper technology your view of the world can be altered so that you can think that any kind of life is perfect. If you deem yourself unhappy with the new system you can be changed.

>>14024023
Hasn't the author of the Culture novels actually said that he wouldn't want to live in it?

>>14023991
>Also, no need for labour and instant gratification? That is only Utopia to a very select few people. Not to me, it isn't. It sounds fucking horrible. No real free will, no responsibility, no denial of anything I desire, no hardships... Man, that's fucking hell.
Actually, instant gratification is the ultimate test of will. Want to be denied something you desire? Do it yourself, no more passing it off on "the world did it bawwwwww". Want a hardship? Take it on yourself. As in the real world, you are still ultimately responsible to yourself.

>>14024049
You're arguing against imaginary books that only exist in your head, sir.

You can go outside a ship (although if you do so unprotected, you will die, because there's this thing called outer space, and at any rate YOU CAN'T GO OUTSIDE A SPACESHIP NOW BECAUSE THERE AREN'T ANY) and you can touch trees, real trees. You can breathe any kind of air you want (and the air on the ships isn't stale).

Hell, you can even live on a PLANET if you're a fan of such perversities.

And as an added bonus, your free will isn't even limited by law in the Culture! 'cause there aren't any laws!

>>14024053
Iain Banks has actually said he'd love to live in the Culture.

>>14024041
Because it's implied to exist in the Culture verse, that's why I mention the baby rape. To show how low and vile it is.

Overcoming diseases and pain gives meaning to life. A sense of accomplishment, of strength. Starvation, shows you your limits, the limits of your mind and system. Some people, like me, like to know them, and put them to the test. What can I get in the Culture? Handjobs from a robot. Yay. Sex doesn't hold much interest to me, and there seems very little else the culture appeals to. No Authority, no responsibility. No dilemmas to solve, no complicated moral choices, nothing.

>>14024072
Er...no, it's not.

Really, what books did you read? Have you read any books? Did you just smoke some hashish and hallucinate that you read a book?

>>14024051
Mutability... A loss of identity and of self... no, definitely not. Learn to deal with what you've been dealt with in life. Filthy hedonist.

I definitely learn things. I may not take anything with me when I go, but I don't care for that anyway. In life, I'll have learned love, and hate, and hardship, and drama and emotions, and how to deal with them. How to deal with other people. How to cope in the world. Or not. And the constant existence of failure and disillusion always make it harder. And teach you valuable lessons.

>>14024085
Humans can change shape, age and sex in the culture verse. Ergo, Baby sex. Or old people sex. Or goat sex. Who knows?

>>14024023

You're likely at the level of 'pointless erudition.'

My advise to the original poster was quite simple:
Do not take the specific circumstances of a character's failing as indicative of the book's conveyed message or the author's intent.
Simply that the negative character portrayal is itself sufficient to cast a negative light on the character's constituent parts.

As a side note: While you might argue that "you can't estimate the author's intent from his writing!"-- that is somewhat naive.

It's functionally irrelevant to the advice, in anycase.
The ecological exploitation aspect was mentioned to trace the intent-route from directly stated intent to implied intent-- because they are linked so often in the text, and one was his stated intent, the other was most likely his intent as well.
Even if not 'consciously.'

For the sake of clarity:
Derivation of Frank Herbert's specific possible intent was done as an example.
It demonstrates that ANY AUTHOR's possible intent may be to incorporate a particular view independant of directly demonstrating it.

Thus one should not take an author's direct demonstrations as the only thing indicative of ancillary message.

>>14024106
Okay, so now you've established that it's possible for someone to change their body to that of a baby, and then find someone willing to have sex with them.

Now we're still waiting on the "rape" part. And, as it just so happens, a "goatman" could be a member of an independent space-faring species somewhere out in the galaxy.

And why the hell does old people being allowed to have sex suddenly destroy free will somehow, or turn a society into a nightmarish dystopia?

>>14024072
Because it's implied to exist as a simulation in the Culture verse - it that not less low and less vile than actual baby rape? (Baby rape exists in the actual low, vile world, by the way.)

>Overcoming diseases and pain gives meaning to life. A sense of accomplishment, of strength. Starvation, shows you your limits, the limits of your mind and system. Some people, like me, like to know them, and put them to the test. What can I get in the Culture? Handjobs from a robot. Yay. Sex doesn't hold much interest to me, and there seems very little else the culture appeals to. No Authority, no responsibility. No dilemmas to solve, no complicated moral choices, nothing.
So, you think that physical hardship is the only kind? Kind of naive, if you ask me. There are many, many ways to plunge yourself into the flame of judgment and emerge worthy, and you don't need a scarcity setting to do it. Humanity in the Culture verse, with all its distateful diversions just goes to show that people there are still at the mercy of their own whims and shortcomings; at some point, you either move past them or become subsumed by them, or die never having faced them.

As a parent, you have to give a child negative and positive feedback. As they mature, your cues start meaning less and less to them, and eventually if they go far enough they are faced with the fact that they are habiting their own lives, and regardless of external censure are subject to the things they have or have not done.

>>14024143
Also, I'd just like to add that YES, A SIMULATION OF AN EVIL THING IS NOT NECESSARILY EVIL.

For the same reason that actors in movies aren't arrested for murder if the plot shows them shooting someone. BECAUSE PRETEND MURDER IS NOT THE SAME AS REAL MURDER. YOU RETARD.

>>14024098
> I'll have learned love, and hate, and hardship, and drama and emotions, and how to deal with them.

Those are only things natural to humans. Everyone can and most likely will learn them, some are of course better than others at some of them but still everything in those is already a pattern in you brain when you are few years old. And you have used no conscious effort in learning them. After that nothing happens automatically but the basics are already there without doing anything.

There is nothing profound in doing something that comes naturally. The difference is in quantity you do it either better or worse but it is still the same thing.

>>14024098
> Mutability... A loss of identity and of self
Actually, we are mutable, and change from instant to instant.
>Learn to deal with what you've been dealt with in life.
The people in the Culture verse have been dealt the Culture verse. They are dealing.

>Or not.
So you're saying that even if you didn't learn, that would be fine? But for the Culture humans that would be contemptible, eh?

>>14024143
I mentioned Mental endurance latter on.

And maybe I can endure the same test in the culture. Maybe. But I wouldn't want to live among a pack of amoral hedonists and their super-duper AI's who fix anything. Put me in the Forrest by my lonesome, and I'll be a fuck lot happier. I appreciate being able to solve my own conundrums and having responsibilities, instead of delegating everything to the robos.

Why are you people even defending this waste of paper?

>>14024175
The Culture is not amoral. And you wouldn't be happy in a forest, you'd be a disease-ridden, starving pile of misery. With a one track mind.

>>14024175

What if you can't solve that which may eternal lie?
And in strange eons even calculators may sigh.

>>14024216
It is a valid guess that there are math problems that are unsolvable. After all math is only a language and normal language has impossible questions too.

>>14024072
This point is actually touched on in the books, if you'd ever tried reading them. There's one particular scene about a guy wiping tables down in a friendly little cafe, a non-culture guy asks him why he's doing it, and he says it's 1: fun for him to relax, he's usually a starship designer, and 2: even though the drones or the Minds could do it with a tiny fraction of the effort, it still gets the job done, and he enjoys it because he's doing something useful with his free time.

Another bunch had a lot of humans go out in retrofitted point defense crafts to go and shoot down a Von Neumann swarm that was harassing a dyson-sphere-thing. That job was quite a bit harder, and even a culture ship took considerable effort in defeating it when they had to do it fast, but the point was humans CAN make a difference, if they want to.

You can choose to make your own responsibilities in the Culture. Sure, if you want to live your life in hedonistic joy you can, but you can also go out to the front lines in any conflict and try helping out. It won't necessarily actually DO very much, but you'd be making an effort to help.

>>14024208

No laws, no ethics. No limitations on what you can or can't do. No scruples. Sounds Amoral to me.

I'd be happy in the forest, because I know how to take care of myself there. Perhaps you should try camping trips, hiking, that sort of thing? And diseased... maybe. And so what? Thats part of the point.

>>14024175
PROTIP: If you want to in the Culture, you can go take a ship, grab ur SKS, fly to an uninhabited world with and go inna woods to live in.

OH GEE HARDSHIPS

Just because you like being shat on doesn't mean it's right for everyone to be shat on. If you had your way you'd be introducing horrible virulent diseases into the modern world just to make sure everyone's enjoying their crippling pains.

>>14024243

Darwin is smiling. You can't see it. But he is.

>>14024243
>No laws, no ethics. No limitations on what you can or can't do. No scruples. Sounds Amoral to me.
Actually, there ARE rules in the Culture. No killing other people, don't try and do stuff to other people that they don't want done to them.

You could get simulations of doing that, but guess what? THERE ARE FUCKING RULES IF YOU'D ACTUALLY READ THE FUCKING BOOKS INSTEAD OF JUST STRAWMANNING THEM YOU'D KNOW THIS

>>14024232
Taking responsibility for an action I know can be solved by others in a fraction the time is no responsibility at all. It's entertainment.

And again, sure, I'd get get some of the same choice I'd get now. But It would be in th context of the Culture, a society with a lifestyle and ideals I absolutely abhor as weakness, self indulgence and irresponsibility. I wouldn't care. I'd be hauling ass of that ship first chance I got. Preferably sabotaging an AI and murdering a few of the diseased filth if at all possible.

>>14024243
They have more ethics than we do.

They just don't have laws.

And I have taken camping trips. Strangely enough, I did it by using clothes and shelter produced in modern factories, and food I didn't catch myself, prepared over a gas burner which is not a naturally occurring formation in the forest.

>>14024232

Humans in the Culture can do nothing. They only think they can do something because they're told that they can't do anything much. The AI will always be better at it. It always knows it is, too. You can't be an AI.

>>14024272
And you are the guy who is talking about morals?

You are an epitome of "Stop liking what I don't like" and very possibly a troll as no one should be this retarded.

>>14024251
So if my only enjoyment of the books would be me imagining how I'd love to get away from them, how can I enjoy them as books? Or find them good? Do explain.

>>14024120
>My advise to the original poster was quite simple
So now it's advice, take it or leave it, and not an argument? (Yes, I realize that implications are inferred). And the original poster in this thread wrote about Imperium v the Federation, so don't call someone the "original" poster on a whim.

> Do not take the specific circumstances of a character's failing as indicative of the book's conveyed message or the author's intent.
Agreed, I never did that.

>Simply that the negative character portrayal CAN BE itself sufficient to cast a negative light on the character's constituent parts.
After all, if for example all of the villains in my book X are white, it does not mean that I or my book are trying to cast the whiteness of a person as a negative; if you argue that it CAN be taken that way, then sure, a reader take a lot of things a lot of ways - not to mention that negative character portrayal is now no longer sufficient to cast that trait in a negative light, since reader agreement is also now required.

Actually, I believe you can estimate the author's intent from his writing. Don't put foolish words in my mouth to make yourself look better by comparison

>The rest.
You are still not distinguishing the demonstrations of an author from that of his work; you might as well confuse mood and tone. If the issue had come up as a matter of Herbert's intent, I'd have said have at it; but it was brought up as a matter of the nature of the book itself. To try to pass one off as indisputably the other is rather dishonest.

>>14024272
Where do you live?

I'm just curious, because if you live in America or any first-world country a similar argument could be made of them in comparison to third-world countries, and if you're in a third-world country you're still using a computer which is obviously a decadent tool of child pornography and virtual rape and are still a hypocrite.

>>14024285

A good question is:
"Why do people read Terry Goodkind books?"

>>14024283
I don't even think he's a troll, just a retarded Internet Tough Guy, there are millions of them on the internet.

>>14024291

I'm currently in Holland, but I don't stay in any country overly long. Do you know why? Because I try to help people all over the place. In Europe, mostly, but Ol' Russia to. Humanitarian aide. I'm on a PC. So what? Half the world has PC in this day and age.

A computer, however, does not singularly serve as a tool for pornography and child rape, and you need to look around a bit before you'll find it. It doesn't endorse it, just individuals making it.

The culture? The Culture have robots dedicated to such business.

>>14024285
PROTIP: THE "CULTURE" SERIES OF BOOKS ARE NOT ABOUT THE FUCKING CULTURE, BECAUSE THAT WOULD BE VERY BORING

FOR THE MOST PART THE CULTURE BOOKS HAPPEN WHERE SOMETIMES AGENTS OF THE CULTURE OR AGENTS OF AGENTS OF THE CULTURE WORK IN THE FAR REACHES OUTSIDE CULTURE SPACE WHERE SHIT GOES DOWN

THERE ISN'T FUCKING MINDS WATCHING WHEN MERC COMPANIES IN CHEAP SHIPS TRY RAIDING TEMPLES AND GETTING THEIR ASSES BURNT OFF FROM REFRACTORY GLASS

THERE AREN'T GIANT SEX ORGIES WHEN A GIANT FLEET IS BEING SPAWNED EVERY SIX SECONDS AND A SOLITARY SHIP IS FIGHTING OFF WAVE AFTER WAVE TO STOP IT DESTROYING AN INHABITED DYSON-SPHERE

THERE AREN'T OMNIPOTENT FIXALLS WHEN THE MAIN CHARACTERS ARE BLEEDING TO DEATH IN A BOTCHED RESCUE ATTEMPT IN THE BOWELS MIDDLE OF A KILLED WORLD ESPECIALLY WHEN THEY'VE ONLY FOUND OUT THEIR LOVED ONES WERE KILLED BY THE SIDE THAT HIRED THEM BECAUSE THEY WERE IN THE WAY OF THE OBJECTIVE

>>14024175
> But I wouldn't want to live among a pack of amoral hedonists and their super-duper AI
So now this isn't about the inability of a person to learn, as you first claimed, but because you don't like them? Ok, sure. You're still responsible for all your own problems, bro. You really think that with more power comes less responsibility? How like an infantile dicatator.

>Why are you people even defending this waste of paper?
I'm not. I'm calling you out on shit you say that doesn't fucking follow what came before it, logically.

>>14024318
>The Culture have robots dedicated to such business.

No it doesn't. And I don't believe you've ever helped a single person in your life, either.

>>14024318

"Half the world" still believes is magical pixie ghosts and enjoys militant warlords taking their food, or jungley-death at the age of 40.

His point is that the Culture to you is what YOU are to someone in a third-world country. Or a tribal society.

And your claims about the computer ARE ALL BLASPHEMY. I'VE SEEN WHAT LIES BEHIND THE MAGIC SCREEN.
YOU'RE JUST COVERING FOR YOUR OWN COMPLICITY IN MAKING CHILD RAPE.
WITHOUT THOSE COMPUTERS, THERE WOULD BE NO CHILD RAPE ON THE INTERNET.
GET RID OF THEM ALL.

You see?

>>14024318
>I try to help people all over the place
Say you've got a tool that allows you to help lots of people all over the place immediately. Would your first instinct be "hey, this is useful, I should help lots of people all over the place immediately" or would you go "OH MY GOD THIS TOOL REMOVES HARDSHIP I MUST SMASH IT"?

Why are you even trying to help people if you believe that them living through hardships is bettering for them?

Can you see how this is really hypocritical?

>His point is that the Culture to you is what YOU are to someone in a third-world country. Or a tribal society.

This. Bleeding-hearts are pretty silly.

>>14024326
No. With more power comes more responsibility. I know that. More power over myself means I am completely responsible for my own actions.

The culture, however defers all their decision making to AIs. I despise that. I'll make my own judgment and decisions, no matter how badly deliberated, and deal with the consequences.

And I can't learn, when everything that is real is taken away, and all moral decisions are made for me, can I? So I learned one thing: I hate the AI for their superiority, and the culture, for their laxity.

>>14024359

You don't make your own decisions.
Your culture does it for you.
And if you don't like the laws, you get jailed.
And if you think you like McDonald's, good. They want you to.

(As a humorous example.)

>>14024359
>The culture, however defers all their decision making to AIs.

No they don't. They let AIs make AI decisions, and AIs let the people make people decisions.

>>14024343
I help people, but I put a lot of emphasis on their own responsibilities. I try to make them remember to take their own medicines on time, to speak up for themselves when they want something, etc... I believe I help people by making them stronger.

If ever I got such a tool as you describe... I'd use it on those who truly need it. Not just anyone. And even then, sparingly.

>>14024243
>No laws, no ethics. No limitations on what you can or can't do. No scruples. Sounds Amoral to me.
So you depend on society to give you these things, they don't exist within you? That doesn't sound like morality to me.

> I'd be happy in the forest, because I know how to take care of myself there.
And you don't know how to take care of yourself in a world where you are left to your own devices, because you'd actually have to face your own existence rather than being distracted by constant drudgery.

>Dutchman
I have respect for the Dutch, but you are misunderstanding the Culture verse in a way that is largely, well, cultural in origin. You think that there are not people who have computers dedicated to child porn? It is a tool, no more. Do you think a robot arm that you command is so different from your own? You give a command, it obeys. You find a robot arm colder, easier, with less trouble and suffering? Do not blame the Culture for your lack of empathy. A robot arm's movement is only as effortless as the movement of a well-tuned athlete's arm, whereas a poorly maintained robot arm will creak and scrape and malfunction or even break.

You had a strong culturally-enhanced emotional reaction to the tropes present in the Culture verse, and that I respect, but your arguments make little sense when carried to their conclusion, my friend.

>>14024359
>The culture, however defers all their decision making to AIs.
I take it you don't vote, never go to see doctors about medical advice, and don't listen to experts in their fields, ever.
>And I can't learn, when everything that is real is taken away, and all moral decisions are made for me
PROTIP: People can, and do question the giant AI Minds about their decisions, and sometimes dislike their decisions. Hell, there are arguments between Minds, too.

It's just that if someone else comes up with a good answer to a problem, what's the problem with going with that answer, especially if the person can explain exactly why it's a good idea? It's like saying you don't want anyone to decide anything for you, even though they would have come to the very same decision as you if given the same information.

>>14024379

Someone has a savior complex.
"Only I'll decide who's worthy of being helped!"
"I won't try to bring cures and food and joy to everyone."
"I won't try to improve the world, I'll settle for masturbating on the control I have over these few people."

>>14024318
4chan is a tool of amoral hedonists. Get off it, you're enabling us. Go sleep in a ditch and drink stagnant pondwater, it sounds much more enjoyable

>>14024370
To a certain extent, it does indeed. But not as vastly and monolithically as THE culture. And you can try and make the best of it within those limitations.

Look, can we stop talking about how stupid I am? I damn well know that. My judgment is flawed, my life style is flawed, and I may even seem hypocritical to some of you. Fair enough. But this isn't a board dedicated to my public defacement, much as I regret it.

So could we perhaps discuss the substance of the Culture books now, and enlighten me then on how I should "like" them?

He thinks he is the final judge of what is worthy hardship and what is burdensome toil, not to mention which people are worthy of helping with a given tool. That's priceless.

>>14024407
You shouldn't. but since you base your dislike on illogical arguments and fallacious strawmen, you have no right to tell anyone that they are objectively bad books.

>>14024400
And I suppose you are more trustworthy? Hah! No one is, so might as well be me. Or do you have better suggestions? ... wait. This is completely fictional, I don't have a massive healer device. And If I did, I know how I'd use it...

>>14024407

It's not that you should like them.
We generally (I surmise) believe you should dislike them.
But the REASON WHY is important.

Dislike them not because they allow people to have pleasure, but because they force people to be only human ever.
Or because their storylines are dull!

>>14024379
>I'd use it on those who truly need it. Not just anyone
But if you've got that tool to fix everything ever..

>Taking responsibility for an action I know can be solved by others in a fraction the time is no responsibility at all. It's entertainment.
Doesn't simply having that tool turn everyone's else's hardships into entertainment?

I mean, if the problems can be fixed so easily, and instead they just trudge through pain and everything?

>>14024418
Yes, I do think that... For myself. I don't force anyone else into it. All I say is, if I was forced into the culture, I'd try to get the fuck out. I wasn't suggesting to build a pulpit and cat down my judgment upon all the people of culture before leaving. Seems rather pointless to waste time on such base scum.

>>14024407
You forget, no one is forcing you to like them, just confronting you about the assumptions you are making that aren't true at all.

Look, I appreciate the intense personal value of struggle and strife, hardship and loss - more than you know. But the human condition is such that when we overcome one obstacle, there are always more. Solving the simple problems, the ones that cause premature death against one's will, just give people a safety net. Think of it as infinite second chances to live a worthy life, instead of being dealt a few bad hands and dying out of hand before you get a chance to rise to the challenge. In the end, there will always be a scarcity of time, and the new.

>>14024407
As stated earlier, >>14024325
Culture books aren't very focused on the Culture itself. It's actually got people focused on surviving or doing stuff that needs to be done by them.

But really, the topic kind of derailed into examining your worldview, because it's quite a surprising one.

>>14024443
It's different. In the case of the culture, you make that decision knowing you don't have to and alternatives are at hand. No man chooses to get sick, and they don't of my magical healing power (Apparently, I got a little Jesus in a box). So it's rather different. If the person in question had deliberately chosen to get sick, while knowing there was a cure, for no other reason than kicks... Yep, that'd be the same.

BUT WHY OGRYNS TOLERATED

>>14024455
>scarcity of time
Barring ridiculously large-scale accidents, there's virtual immortality. So actually, no.
I'm aware that I'm hurting your argument, but it's flawed.

>>14024469
In one of the books, the entire crew of a ship has a cold. Just because they can, and because feeling better after feeling lousy is nice

This thread has made me smile.
There's still faggotry in the world...
But there are at least more people who care about the reason why something occurs.

>>14024462
For some reason, I always get that... Not once can people say "huh. alright then." it's always debating about the merits and values of such an ideology. And I still somehow mess up explaining it, every. Single. Time.

Eh, I read a bit in one of the Culture books. Didn't hold my interest for very long. It's boring. Conflict resolution always seems contrived to keep the AI doing something else until it gets around to protagonist n focus.

>>14024487

In one of the books, ALL IS DEATH. ALL IS PAIN.

BLOOD FOR THE BLOOD GOD.
SKULLS FOR THE SKULL THRONE.

>>14024434
>>14024451
> No one is, so might as well be me.
Might makes right, the will to power, etc? Fair enough, I believe in that to some degree anyhow. But don't pretend to do things to people 'for their own good' then.
>Or do you have better suggestions?
Self-restraint, for one. If you lack it as you seem to, no wonder a world where people decide their own fate so utterly terrifies and disgusts you so.
>This is completely fictional
So is the Culture verse.
>Yes, I do think that... For myself. I don't force anyone else into it.
So you don't force anyone else into your judgments, but you will decide who deserves to be healed and who should bear it to "improve their character"? That is quite literally fucking with people's lives based on your judgments.
> All I say is, if I was forced into the culture, I'd try to get the fuck out.
Actually, anyone can just scroll up and see that you were saying much, much more. If that was all you meant to say, then there is nothing to say of course you can do what you want in that hypothetical situation.

Why did you start this if you didn't wish to discuss it?

>>14024487
Precisely my point. Weird fucks. On the one hand, I understand it, as it's the feeling of overcoming something and all that, on the other hand, that they did it for cheep kicks and for no other reason than that they felt like it. Bloody hedonist, self indulgent pus bags.

>>14024494
Some books are more miss than hit if you dislike the post-scarcity thing, it's true.

Incidentally, does anyone get vibes of Horza the Changer from the "AIs make humans weak and stagnant" anon?

He really does. He even uses quite a few similar slurs now I come to think of it.

...Are we getting trolled hard?

>>14024505
>Why did you start this if you didn't wish to discuss it?

I... don't know. I took it a little too far into my personal views, instead of sticking to a little more objective point about the culture. Let's say that I get passionate about things easily (which indeed, is no great argument for me retaining the powers of christ).

Oh, and do not believe the Culture make their fate. We do, much more so. They are restricted to their ships, and fictional holograms and whatnot. We actually determine what we will do with our lives. Or not. And try to overcome our limitations. Culture... don't. They do shit for shits and giggles.

>>14024481
It's all good, if you aren't convinced by something I say by all means point it out in a friendly way like you just did.

Consider that time is a scarce resource even if you can't run out of it; it is continuously spent whether you spend it on something or not, and the perceived concurrency of time is what lends significance to the social experience, ergo it can be wasted. More like a river than a well, if that kind of example helps you.

>>14024528
Who's Horza the changer?

>>14024505
Before I forget: Yes, I'd murder the whole lot if I got a chance. Or at least give them a chance at redemption. But mostly, that would be a bonus. On the whole, I'd just want to get the hell out.

>>14024541
While I'm not really happy about your views, they've certainly been interesting to hear about. I personally disagree with a minimalist approach to creating a utopian society, but can vaguely understand why you feel that way.

>>14024565
Well, why don't you tell me yours? That way we can both make fun of one another and see how it would match with fictional science fiction universes no one cares about. Except me, of course.

>>14024553
Horza's one of the main characters in Consider Philebas, who actively works against the Culture during the Culture-Idiran war.

He believed as said earlier "he despises the Culture for its dependence on machines and apparent spiritual emptiness", but really isn't an evil person or anything, just very strong-minded in his beliefs.

The book ends badly for everyone involved, including the members of the Culture.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bora_Horza_Gobuchul

>>14024541

Which they didn't determine that they wanted to do themselves, of course.
As well, AIs are people too. What about them?
They can do whatever they like, and it will be something that they did themselves.

Or are you suggesting that you shouldn't use glasses because you didn't invent glasses.
And thus are a fucking leech.

>>14024541
> They are restricted to their ships,
Already stated as false.
> and fictional holograms and whatnot.
Do you actually think a person can be restricted to a fictional hologram? I know I shouldn't pick on your for language since english isn't your mother tongue, but still. It's just untrue.
>We actually determine what we will do with our lives. Or not.
Exactly. People are put into the world, and do. Or don't. And no amount of ability can change that.
>Culture... don't. They do shit for shits and giggles.
Many people live this mortal life of ours for shits and giggles. "Life is a game, just find the right one" and all that. Culture level technology doesn't force you to live a certain way, so your distaste comes from how you feel you would react with access to such technology. All of humanity isn't like you, and all of Culture isn't one way just because you paint them like that. There are people who live painless, meaningless lives today - it has little to do with Culture.

When confronted with disgust, always examine inward - since you are so keen on self-betterment.

>>14024596
And you think I imitate him while consistently showing a lack of knowledge of the Culture novels that is tremending? Hm... Of course, you might think that was part of the Trolling.

But... what if I am actually trolling you know. And wasn't before? Or was I?

>>14024609
Hey bro, >eyeaintevenmad.jpg

>>14024608

English is male, you nit.

>>14024595
>Well, why don't you tell me yours?
Sure, give me a starting point, I'll be glad to rant about my personal beliefs and have them poked full of holes by the greatest minds in /tg/.

>>14024629
"mother tongue" is an english expression that applies to languages. english doesn't recognize the gender of specific languages. the reason that it's "mother tongue" and not "father tongue" is, among other things, that the latin for language is lingua, which is feminine.

>>14024608
Hm... yes. But the Culture does project an image of meaningless hedonism, and does nothing to take away that image. That it might not hold true for all of them, that is invariably so with anything. But Human minds are keen to generalize. So I did. And now I must go flog myself for my stupidity. Freaking basic failure to instincts, that.

And I can't understand those people who live like that today. Don't they enjoy the freezing cold, which make you feel alive? The taste of blood in your throat after a long run? The feel of your muscles after a long swim? The immense strength it takes to stay awake when near exhaustion? How can they not enjoy that?

Different people, different views I suppose. More the fools they are! Haha!

>>14024638
Hm... Your feelings on compassion, mercy and such values? Define them as you please yourself.

>>14024595
Similar to the cultures; help everyone that requests help, unless it involves bothering other people (for example no murdering others).

I do not believe hardships strengthen people; I don't see how struggling through years of work or sacrifice improves an end product if it can be produced just as well through someone clicking a switch to do so. If I had the power to make it so that no-one HAD to work I'd do so immediately, and remove all disease and means of death except by suicide, I'd do it with very little thought (blah blah criminals can't be removed from society etc) - apart from that, anyone can do whatever they want.

I'd wager this'd cause a lot of issues, scientific stagnation to a degree for one, but I'd prefer a world where the only suffering people endure is pain that they choose to bear.

>>14024609
>You think I imitate him while consistently showing a lack of knowledge of the Culture novels that is tremending
Well, he had some strange ideas as to what the Culture got up to, and also didn't change his mind when corrected...

Well, even if you are a troll (perhaps?) I'm still having fun discussing this so whatever~

>>14024672

Do you think we care?
English is male.
It is a father.
The fatherland wills it.

>>14024690
>I don't see how struggling through years of work or sacrifice improves an end product if it can be produced just as well through someone clicking a switch to do so.

But what did you learn from the flipping of the switch? Nothing. What did you learn from a lifetime of decision making and hardship? Responsibility, autonomy, self control and a bit of common sense, if all went well. Perhaps even a strong body to boot.

Your ideal society would be lazy, irresponsible dregs with no idea on how to treat unforeseen consequences, or any sort of self reliance. One thing fails, and your entire society is doomed to starve due to their own ineptness. I'd be a society of spoilt brats. Believe me, I've seen many kids in this country raised without ever having been disciplined, ir made to work or suffer for their toys and rewards, and they have invariably become spoilt little brats with an enormous sense of entitlement.

>>14024674
> But the Culture does project an image of meaningless hedonism, and does nothing to take away that image.
So, guilt through inaction? But you would not save the world from suffering if you had the power...

>Don't they enjoy the freezing cold, which make you feel alive? The taste of blood in your throat after a long run? The feel of your muscles after a long swim? The immense strength it takes to stay awake when near exhaustion? How can they not enjoy that?
Sure, they enjoy it. But life is more than that. We struggle for something, and our struggles bring suffering, and some of us draw strength and a sense of continuity from that suffering, but it is not the goal of the struggle, just a familiar byproduct. Life is finite and we must do something with it, or not - so keeping yourself awake for days until you die as a test of strength isn't an expression of life, it is being too cowardly to face the next day of struggle. Our mortal life is more than dying with a broken body and a mind full of experiences - you have to have purposeful effect on those around you.

We both seem to believe that it is desirable to be the architect of our own destinies. Tell me, do you think architecture was exalted or degraded by the discovery of better tools, methods, materials? I love camping and the outdoors, and getting dirty and bloody covered with scratches and sweat, but that does not make a hedonist even though I could choose to stay at home instead.

>>14024730
>Our mortal life is more than dying with a broken body and a mind full of experiences - you have to have purposeful effect on those around you.

Ah, now see, that is your personal Ethos. We both know that humans, fundamentally, have no real reason for living, and must make one for ourselves -the entire point of existentialism is to argue that- You chose to make yours service to other people, usefulness, practicality. That's fine. But then, like me, you make the mistake of applying it to everybody. Your ideal is valid for you alone.It is not an absolute truth. Like my ideal is just a permanent means with no end, yours is a more conceivable one. But it still only holds true for you, and those who choose to believe it.

Architecture... hm, yes and no. At first, it was improved, in the time of the romans up until the sumptuous baroque cathedrals of the renaissance. But it's gone to hell these days, tools or no tools. Blocks of Ugly cement and steel and glass everywhere. The tools are just that- tools. It is that man that wields them that matters.

>>14024683
Compassion, mercy and such values? I will take it that you mean altruism in general, then. Since it is generally defined as the "unselfish" concern for the welfare of others, I would say that it has its place in human emotions, but is rather outdated in a mature mind.

Why? Not because I think helping people is foolish, far from it. You need to think of yourself when helping others, because you are one of the variables in the helping, both in the short and the long term. A "selfless" person repairing a dike guarding thousands from drowning will work feverishly till his last breath to save them. A "selfish" person will work as long as they are able to comfortably, rest and eat and drink and work again the next day, unless the extra couple hours of work that day is the deciding factor in the dike's survival, which only saves you and the others if there are reinforcements due to arrive at dawn; in that way, the "selfish" concerned citizen can be worth 1000 "selfless" citizens.

>>14024722
This society as I described it, yes, will not be very secure if there are problems that stop the miraculous post-scarcity. However, there are ways around this; firstly, provide everyone with the ability to be self-sufficient, should they so require. That means, even IF everything fails, if they've got a will to survive they'll do so. Secondly, lots and lots of backups to ensure that there's no single point of failure.

>what did you learn from the flipping of the switch? Nothing. What did you learn from a lifetime of decision making and hardship? Responsibility, autonomy, self control and a bit of common sense

The results of the flipping of the switch provides continued survival by means of eating or having a place to sleep; similarly, a lifetime of decision making and hardship produces (hopefully) continued survival of the same.
Responsibility, autonomy, self-control are all not guaranteed, and if they turn up, they're side-effects of the survival. You might as well get hate, bitterness, misantrophy (especially after working retail) and depression out of that lifetime of hardship. And you yourself note common sense is pretty rare even in working folk.
If you want to cultivate responsibility, autonomy and self control and good traits, it's better to do so directly, instead of hoping it comes about via work.

Regarding brats: One of the main reasons brats get away with being bratty is because they've got something other people want, lots of physical wealth. That allows them to get nontangible stuff like people fawning over them and so on. In a post-scarcity society, EVERYONE has got that stuff, so there's nothing to cause that behaviour. Instead, people will be trading on respect and awe, which will require some sort of ability, if they want people to like them.

As for the people who'll just connect themselves to wank machines or something? Eh, so what? They're having fun.

>>14024789
>But then, like me, you make the mistake of applying it to everybody.
Not really, no. You asked, "Don't they enjoy the freezing cold, etc." I was sharing a point of view hoping to help you understand how those can live as they do, not saying it was an absolute truth. Sorry if I was unclear, it is an artifact of language.

>But it's gone to hell these days, tools or no tools.
Your failure to love the environment in which you were born is not unique. You think there were none in Roman times who found their architecture ugly? A cold, stony blight on the green, living earth? Of course there were some.

>It is that man that wields them that matters.
Ah! Finally something I can agree with all my heart. You see, tools do not unmake the man, and man will never be without a wilderness to explore, because the world is the world no matter what is in it and the depths of his soul are as murky and dark as his furthest ancestors.

>>14024807
But surely, if everyone has physical wealth, and everyone is a brat or a bitch (this getting very Jersey Shore) then they have nothing of value to offer, do they?

To me the greatest thing anyone can offer is their personality, who they are. If everyone is self indulgent twits (though probably not all, I'd say it is likely many if not most would be). I cast out your society for it's mindless materialism! Nah, but it is pretty risky to base an entire society on such untested ideas, with every chance that when the things holding up your wealthy society break, it would be everyone for himself, and no one knowing how.

Autonomy and Responsibility will be created in someone, if you put them to work, or in a situation, where he needs to take care of himself, and make decisions for himself. The wild preferably, but a book shop might work, if less extremely so. More sociable though. So maybe better people skills. But that is what happens in modern society, and look at the kids around you (well, In Holland anyway) They are knife wielding thugs with no respect for law or authority. Poor education breeds poor citizens.

>>14024807
Not to mention you have to build the switch first to flip it, or at least learn why you flip this switch and not the other.

Technological stagnation does not breed virtue, nor does technological fecundity degrade into sin. Man does these things in himself, each one and in each moment.

>>14024806
Hm.. yes, I see your point, and I can agree with it to some extent, but I do see it as my responsibility to take care of those weaker than me, or in need. This because, I may I can take of myself, but I can't just trust everyone to be able to do same, should I? So until they prove capable, I'd care for them. To me, it's more about responsibility than actions. They are intertwined, of course. So it's the motivation that counts as much for me, as the actual action. Not that the action can't be foul and the motivation good, and vice versa, but both matter. Not just the action. At least to me.

>>14024852
Yes, but neither do tools MAKE the man, as >>14024807 describes it. It is always your own strength, and personality, you as a person, that make the decisions, the difference. So then it is best to have the man as capable as can be, right? So I say, man must put himself through hardship and deprivation, that he may learn his virtues, understand, and control, himself. And fundamentally, be capable. And perhaps understanding is a virtue I should add to my list.

>>14024858
>But surely, if everyone has physical wealth, and everyone is a brat or a bitch (this getting very Jersey Shore) then they have nothing of value to offer, do they?

That's WHY they'll stop being brats. They need to make friendly connections to other people if they want to gain admiration or respect. If they do, people don't have to deal with them, because they're not providing anything at all.

>brats with knives
Yeah, the place will still need a security force to stop stuff like that. But if the basic needs for EVERYTHING is provided, then there wouldn't be so much of that, since there's no need to steal or harm except if you want to annoy or injure the other person itself.

Which would be stopped.

Education would also be useful. Maybe I could get a magical device that educates people instantly would be good too. And in case of breakdown I'd make "create more magical device" kits all over the place so they could fix it up if it goes wrong.

>>14024858
>But surely, if everyone has physical wealth, and everyone is a brat or a bitch (this getting very Jersey Shore) then they have nothing of value to offer, do they?
Physical wealth isn't the only kind of wealth, nor does it guarantee the other kinds in any way. Consider that not all the wealthy are brats, and not all poor are saints.

>To me the greatest thing anyone can offer is their personality, who they are.
Exactly!
>If everyone is self indulgent twits
You cannot assume your conclusion as part of your logic.

>it is pretty risky to base an entire society on such untested ideas
Well, all societies are based on ideas that were once untested, you know. We don't prove our ideas and then form a society, society is forming all the time even when we aren't looking.

>with every chance that when the things holding up your wealthy society break, it would be everyone for himself, and no one knowing how.
That nightmare is equally possible today, so your argument is becoming less about Culture verse and more about technology in general. Do you know how many would die if we lost the secret of insulin? Or any of a hundred common lifesaving drugs? Even if someone destroyed all the sources of fresh water on Earth, the strongest would survive. Would you advise that be done? Or is it foolish, and dangerous?

>Autonomy and Responsibility will be created in someone, if you put them to work
Physical work is not the only kind of work, and the presence of AI does not remove the decisions from a life. In reality, increased technology increases the number of decisions that need to be made.

>Poor education breeds poor citizens.
Very true, but off topic. Bad character is the accumulation of self-deceptions and bad decisions, while the lack of decisions is only called weak character. Weak character can be trained up relatively easily compared to reforming bad character.

>>14024887
Countering your addition to my original argument, it's not like the original builders of the switch's hard work is in question, rather the third generation after the original builders who hasn't had to do anything but flip the switch.

And even flipping switches isn't that bloody hard.

>>14024972
>But if the basic needs for EVERYTHING is provided, then there wouldn't be so much of that, since there's no need to steal or harm except if you want to annoy or injure the other person itself.
A thirst for power and dominance is still something people have, and if you can't repress that (and how would you besides through education? Consider my tracking through the wood a form of education) Than how will you prevent people from conniving and backstabbing? because they will. Because any society will have Hierarchies, Official or not. Look at The average court in the 1600's and the order of the courtiers.

Brats will be brats. They don't understand reasoning with people, they are used to getting everything they want. No disputes. Like I mentioned before, I do humanitarian aide, and amongst the many things it makes me do, is occasionally take care of children. When they are spoilt, they have no redemption. Not for me to give them in a week, anyway. They don't understand the very concept that you would willingly deny them something. They'll demand, coerce and threaten, unless they get their way, or make sure you get in trouble with the parents. Now imagine what teenagers and older will do.

>>14024980
>Would you advise that be done? Or is it foolish, and dangerous?

I would not. but I would make sure people were prepared to deal with it, should that situation arise.

On Creating good character and avoiding bad character:
You can only build a sense of responsibility, by giving people responsibilities. You can only give them autonomy, by showing them how. And so on. This can be achieved in numerous ways, but fundamentally, they need to be put under pressure, faced with duties and obligations. Laxness breeds the bad character you speak of. Give them work any sort of work, but I would still say that a few months of forestry would do them no harm, and would strengthen their character. So like the other said, no suffering? Impossible. Some denial and suffering will be required, no matter how infinitesimal.

And if you do not build them to be strong and capable, the they will become weak willed, and then you get your brats, and twits. With no kind personality to speak of.

>>14025050
>A thirst for power and dominance is still something people have, and if you can't repress that Than how will you prevent people from conniving and backstabbing?
How, exactly, do you connive and backstab, when there's no real way to hurt someone physically, and there's nothing to steal that can't be replicated instantly? Without physical leverage over others, it's not such an easy task.

When you require responsibility and hard work to gain that very power and dominance over people, then that's a GOOD thing - you only have responsible people with power (and that power's negligible, considering it's reliant on other people sticking around that person in the first place).

The thing about brats is that they are given everything their parents can afford. I'm not offering EVERYTHING ever, but "merely" physical stuff, primarily things for survival but if we can provide luxury stuff then that too. It won't bring friendship from other humans, it won't bring lovers, it won't bring people flocking to see you. If brats in my ideal society want something from other people, they have to stop being brats to get it, or people will just get bored of them and walk away.
And since everyone has everything needed to survive, there is literally nothing the brats can do to coerce or torture or threaten.

(Well, apart from crowd popularity, but that's a fickle thing in itself)

>>14024915
> I do see it as my responsibility to take care of those weaker than me, or in need
Doing so is beneficial to you in a broad sense, whether you know it or not, that is the reason why a selfless act is a myth.

>neither do tools MAKE the man
no, not that >>14024807 says that in any way, but tools help man interact with the world around him and his fellow man, and that shapes his experience - for surely a man is not born perfect and wise from the womb?

>So I say, man must put himself through hardship and deprivation, that he may learn his virtues, understand, and control, himself. And fundamentally, be capable.
Agreed a thousand times. Well, partially. A man must seek personal growth, and that is not always satisfied by intentionally putting oneself through hardship. For instance a man who dogmatically undoes identical hardships to his father in a changed world is not necessarily equipped to deal with the new world.

>>14024972
>That's WHY they'll stop being brats. They need to make friendly connections to other people if they want to gain admiration or respect.
Bad logic. There are plenty of people today who need to make friendly connections to other people if they want to gain admiration or respect, yet fail to do so.
>Yeah, the place will still need a security force to stop stuff like that.
Either infeasible because of the power of the average citizen or it results in a big brother police state.
>there's no need to steal or harm except
Yeah, except. There are plenty of people who steal other than to make a living or kill other than to escape.
>Maybe I could get a magical device that educates people instantly would be good too.
Brainwashing much?
>in case of breakdown I'd make "create more magical device" kits all over the place so they could fix it up if it goes wrong.
You can't make a foolproof safety system, all the backups having backups wouldn't create an infallible system. The only way you can really tie us to the technology inextricably is to tie it to our individual survival, rolling the dice on the survival of the human race... not that we'd be fundamentally human at that point, and most would call that kind of power of us slavery although it's no worse than being slaves to our physical bodies.

>>14025183
>When you require responsibility and hard work to gain that very power and dominance over people, then that's a GOOD thing - you only have responsible people with power (and that power's negligible, considering it's reliant on other people sticking around that person in the first place).

Hah, you underestimate Charisma, and that on /tg/ tsk, tsk. No many leaders have held groups under their sway with little more than their charisma and strong spirit alone. And that doesn't make them nice people. Not at all.
Look at Hitler and His Sturm Abteilung in the late 20's. No promises, no power, no wealth, nothing. Yet he still gained more followers every week.

Yes, but see, no one would have had a proper education, telling them what's wrong and right, denying them anything, so the vast majority of people will be brats. Look at noble houses, and how many of them are arseholes compared to the number who are kinder folk. Staggeringly more arseholes. So what would happen, is more or less what happens on /tg/ on spergday. Huge, huge arguments and debacles about everything, no matter how flimsy.

But ofcourse, none of this is tested in practice, but if I could make it a more controlled society, I would. Seems like a set up for failure. But then, to me, so seems every post scarcity setting. No ambitions, no hardship... Oh, you know this drill.

>>14025224
Ah, I didn't say I committed a selfless act. I agree, you can't actually perform a selfless act, as it will benefit you in some form in the long run, intentionally or no.
I just see it as a good rule of thumb to help those weaker than yourself. That is your duty, if you decide you are responsible, and capable. Live up to it.

Personal growth is one thing. Capability is another. One can achieve personal growth without this affecting one's abilities, or even judgment. This is why hardship, and thus experience, is needed. Nothing beats actual practice. But study, and development should of course complement the physical side. Self control can only come through self analysis. Discipline, through self denial. It's both physical and mental.

The man who undergoes those hardships in a different world, would still have use of them in the new one. Finding your way by the stars is useful even in the city. Discipline can be applied to anything. If you can hunt and survive in the wild, you will have developed autonomy, which will give you a certain mindset, which can help you in persevering in a new, unknown world, or through difficult situations.

>>14025235
>There are plenty of people today who need to make friendly connections to other people if they want to gain admiration or respect, yet fail to do so.
And unless they're hurting other people, that's fine. They can dig their own graves, or learn to be better people, or go wander into a forest if they want, as long as they don't bother others.

>Either infeasible because of the power of the average citizen or it results in a big brother police state.
Discussing the issue of pros and cons a big brother state will probably require a whole other thread, especially with this one on autosage. I don't think that's the best place to take this (unless a new thread's in order? Probably not). Let's assume that it's a magical wand-wavy police force that stops people hurting each other (...unless they like being hurt. Or whatever)

>Yeah, except. There are plenty of people who steal other than to make a living or kill other than to escape.
Again, if they're not hurting people, they can do what they want. If they ARE, assume the magical police force stops them without harming them. There's always going to be people doing that "for the hell of it", but in any society that DOESN'T have everything available on hand people will steal more, simply because it's one way to survive that can be very effective. Providing food to everyone certainly isn't going to INCREASE crime.

>Brainwashing much?
So's school. Assume one just jumps into a virtual reality where you get schooled for several years or something, or other.

>>14024987
Any sufficiently advanced program ends up requiring more and more detailed input from its user in order to provide the highest level of service. "Babysitter mode" technology is something that gets a point across in a scifi novel or tv episode, it's not how sophisticated applications work in real life.

>And even flipping switches isn't that bloody hard.
No respect for air traffic comptrollers, djs, construction machine operators, or any of a hundred professions that is composed mainly of flipping simple switches, eh?

>>14025050
>A thirst for power and dominance is still something people have
And will always have; you can't really suppress it, only redirect it. Denying it always leads to disaster.

There is always some social currency, and people will always vie for it. To take the example of courtiers, even when everyone in the court is set for life with riches and the no one has interest in executing/assasinating nobles, they will still scheme and struggle and plot for power, or favour, or women, or horses, or more wealth. Physical vulnerability has little to do with it.

>On Creating good character and avoiding bad character:
We have already discussed how physical work is not the only work, and how in fact the distancing of the flesh actually highlights to will as the instrument of a man's destiny. I do agree that too much distance is detrimental and that physical labour is innately rewarding and an unrivaled for a person to get in touch with themselves and their place in the universe but you act like it is a panacea, and the only option to encourage good character. It isn't.

>If brats in my ideal society want something from other people, they have to stop being brats to get it, or people will just get bored of them and walk away.
It doesn't work that way, since not all wants are physical wants there is still plenty of leverage. You are also ignoring the brats as a group, instead of one brat in a sea of your 'ideal' people. There are plenty of holes in that logic.

>And since everyone has everything needed to survive, there is literally nothing the brats can do to coerce or torture or threaten.
Have... have you never been in a social environment before?
>(Well, apart from crowd popularity, but that's a fickle thing in itself)
Ah, nevermind.

>>14025235
(field too long)

>impossible to have enough backups

Redundancy is my second, third, fourth and thirty-ninth name. In a post-scarcity society, the whole point is you can churn out as many replicatory devices as you need, with as much isolation as needed. You can bury them in the crust with small bases, put them on the moon, and put them in all sorts of places that would take cracking the planet apart to destroy them. And at that point, humanity would be fucked anyway, so it's kind of moot. Decentralization can do a whole lot towards that, especially if one keeps some machines off the net.

>>14025242
>Look at Hitler and His Sturm Abteilung in the late 20's. No promises, no power, no wealth, nothing
If Hitler could do nothing to the jews but rant and rave, then no-one would really have cared. Still assuming all-powerful police force here.

>>14025375
>>14025379
>>14025333

Well, seems to me m natural ways, and your high tech ones have failed. One solution remains open: Complete and utter genocide of every living being bigger than a microbe, and start all over again. If we can't fix it, we'll have to remake it.

No, but in seriousness, we all know an Utopia is completely impossible, by any means. We can only try to be the best as we can.

And for that you need to understand Suffring, pain, and endurance says I.
And the Other man says no! We need to abolish all pain and suffering, so that man desires nothing and is satisfied.
No! Shouts the third. You're all Twits! A compromise is necessary!

And then we hanged the 3rd man, for he was making too much sense, and we can't have that.

>>14025381
>If Hitler could do nothing to the jews but rant and rave, then no-one would really have cared.

Oh boy... I think you need to read up on the SA. Storm division. They were called that for a reason. They carried those clubs for a reason. They did a LOT more than rant and rave. Kristalnacht was their executed by them, based on smaller, previous attacks.

>>14025375
Jeezus, George, it's just one switch!

Regarding social-fu, eh. That's one thing difficult to regulate; you can't measure insults the same way you can measure a punch to the face. But some people being assholes just for the sake of being assholes isn't, I feel, as bad as people having to murder and steal to survive, or even grub through the dirt to basic crops that may or may not keep them alive.

>>14025477
Right you are. Lobotomies and cogitator implants for everyone it is!

>>14025415
No-one's tried actually murdering over the net, though. Besides, this is just a frank exchange of views.

>>14025432
You missed the point: if Hitler and all of his followers were PHYSICALLY INCAPABLE of harming the jews, or denying them physical property, they would have been downgraded from genocidal fuckheads to irritating loudmouths.
Which was the whole point.

>>14025507
...Right, not sure if sarcasm while misinterpreting my point or if sarcasm while correctly interpreting my point.

(My point being mind-control devices being a step too far)

>I just see it as a good rule of thumb to help those weaker than yourself.
Of course, I just think it is better to KNOW that helping others is in your interest. Like it is better to obey your father because of your conviction in the command rather than out of fear or affection. In a way, a rule of thumb is like technology - it is easier to just obey it than to use your judgment for every situation, you don't have to understand a rule to obey it.

>>14025242
>if I could make it a more controlled society, I would.
You need to give up this "control" mentality. Read Frank Herbert's Dune book series with an open mind. If you've read them before, read them again. You'll be amazed how much more there is for your mind to devour with just a few years' advantage. I plan on rereading into my old age.

>One can achieve personal growth without this affecting one's abilities, or even judgment.
Our definitions of personal growth differ, for how can you have grown as a person if you cannot act or think any differently than before?

>The man who undergoes those hardships in a different world, would still have use of them in the new one.
No. You cannot find your way by the stars in the largest modern cities for many different reasons, most relating to visibility of the start; not to mention that in a well-designed city finding your way by the starts is actually a very poor method of finding your way around. The nature of discipline is different depending on the activity, that is why different branches of knowledge can be called disciplines. If you can hunt and survive in the wild, it will not serve you if that kind of wilderness no longer exists, ie, that level of autonomy no longer serves in the present world. All training and preparations have limits, even when it comes to character.

>And unless they're hurting other people, that's fine.
But we've established they still can hurt other people in your scenario, they just can't make them starve or bleed to death.

>Let's assume that it's a magical wand-wavy police force
stop how? it's important. and what staffs this police force? people? machines? plenty of angles of approach.

>in any society that _, people will _
when you speak in absolutes, you're always wrong.

shit, I just realized something. by what measure are you judging your ideal society? it's no use arguing about whether or not it's as good as you think without stating that openly first. are you trying to minimize suffering? strife? please elaborate.

>>14025525
Ah, the day murder and battery become available through the net...

But how would you make it physically impossible for him to do so? Mind control? Ever present police force? Seems you need a lot of work invested in that idea... It's a difficult thing to d without going against your whole principal guideline of "no rights denied". You can't just go and brainwash and enslave, the point was peaceful Utopia (I believe).

The human condition does not change, until we are no longer human. This thread is autosaging, but talking with you guys was a lot of fun.

>>14025573
>The man who undergoes those hardships in a different world, would still have use of them in the new one.
>No. You cannot find your way by the stars in the largest modern cities for many different reasons, most relating to visibility of the start; not to mention that in a well-designed city finding your way by the starts is actually a very poor method of finding your way around. The nature of discipline is different depending on the activity, that is why different branches of knowledge can be called disciplines. If you can hunt and survive in the wild, it will not serve you if that kind of wilderness no longer exists, ie, that level of autonomy no longer serves in the present world. All training and preparations have limits, even when it comes to character.

The point is the mindset it creates, A disciplined and autonomous mind can be applied far beyond how it was originally learned. It's called adaptability, and is one of our most fundamental skills. Learning to herd a herd of bizons can help in riot control. Same patterns. Animals, both.

You don't lose Discipline. If you discipline yourself to wake up at 8:00 every morning, and go for a run, and stick to it, this mindset will creep more and more into you, until you can give yourself commands on the spot, even when you're not in the mood, or don't want to. It's the mind. Not the activity that thought it.

>>14025626
Been autosaging for a while now. Yeah, it was a nice chat.

But the human condition... We can always seek to overcome it. We are still limited by it, but look at us now and to our ancestors in the Neolithic. Some would argue this a good thing. On the whole, I agree. But we could do with a bit less sedentary life style and more connection to nature, I feel.

>>14025573
>stop how? it's important. and what staffs this police force? people? machines? plenty of angles of approach.
its_magic_I_ain't_gotta_explain_shit.jpg
But it could take lots of forms. Going back to the culture example, you WOULD need near-omniscience, and then probably teleporters or something. Teleport anyone aiming or physically swinging anything dangerous away from anyone else, or the victim away.

Yes, it infringes of privacy. No, I don't really see that as a hideous terrible problem, especially if it the data isn't recorded.
>are you trying to minimize suffering? strife? please elaborate.
All physical suffering, first and foremost. Mental suffering is much more of a delicate issue and I can't really elaborate except on a case-by-case basis which will take ages.
>>14025586
Lets go with the teleport the attackers away before they get off any shots, shall we?

>>14025677
>>14025626
Ah, the joys of noko.

>The point is the mindset it creates
There are levels of discipline, autonomy, and adaptability - what is considered strict discipline to one man in one time may not be to another; the same with autonomy and adaptability. I was just pointing out that a person can prescribe to your philosophy on whatever level he understands it and still go wrong. Guess that's true for all, though.

>You don't lose Discipline. If you discipline yourself to wake up at 8:00 every morning, and go for a run, and stick to it, this mindset will creep more and more into you, until you can give yourself commands on the spot, even when you're not in the mood, or don't want to. It's the mind. Not the activity that thought it.
I generally agree, I'm not sure why I gave you a hand time over discipline.

Also, looks like we can migrate to this thread
>>14023740

>>14025853
Because arguing is fun and we must all do more of it?

>>14025893
I disagree, arguing may or may not be fun but it is necessary and we require more of it.

YES

>>14025677
Sorry, I wasn't clear. The human condition is our strongest ally and our strongest bond, and the hardest teacher. I hope to never be parted from it.

>its_magic_I_ain't_gotta_explain_shit.jpg
Then we've got a problem, since you seem to be using 'ideal' (purely abstract, sometimes to the point of irrelevance), and I'm using 'ideal' (best possible configuration - if it doesn't exist/work, it ain't perfect).

>minimize all physical suffering, first and foremost. Mental suffering is much more of a delicate issue and I can't really elaborate except on a case-by-case basis which will take ages.
You think physical suffering is so much simpler? I'm going to have to be a jerk and disabuse you of that notion. Let's pretend 'mind' vs 'body' isn't a false dichotomy that has been done to death, and let me just point out some things.

If you teleport away the attacker, the victim is still vulnerable to whatever was set up; if the victim, you have just wasted that person's time - one of their only remaining squander-able resources, to hear some tell it. "Between depriving a man of an hour of his life and depriving him of his life exists only a matter of degree," etc.

Since you are minimizing physical SUFFERING, if you can kill someone before they can register anything, no suffering and you're good, right? Or perhaps being dead is the greatest suffering, in which case the only absolute way to limit that suffering into the future is to reduce the production of new people to zero, ever. Mindslaves or forcible castration, or I suppose you can just teleport mates away from each other endlessly, although at that point you are fighting against human nature and creating a living hell of undying misery, really.

>>14026037
And I should probably announce that I probably won't go to that other thread. The play transhumanism debates tend to go on /tg/ bores the life out of me. Too many argumentative dead ends that I've picked all the fruit from long ago.

>>14026061
Neither am I, but that thread turned to trolling anyway.

Hey lads, gotta go. Work day's over. See you guys again... Whenever.

>>14026037
>the victim is still vulnerable to whatever was set up
Teleporting any weapons systems before they discharge would also remedy this. Yes, it may be fallible, but it'd be harder and harder as each failure will later be taken into account. Also, people who have demonstrated a propensity to have violence could be monitored more closely and be halted before they carry out further attacks.

>perhaps being dead is the greatest suffering
I'd rate it as less than eternal agonising pain, actually. An exact quantifiable figure is beyond me, but there are worse sufferings, literal fates worse than death.

As such, I'd try to minimise deaths, but not at the expense of interaction with other individuals. That's just silly, even if we could save a few thousand that get past above system of law enforcement, the resulting depression would end up killing even more probably.

>>14026061
>>14026072
Welp,

Good talking with you. Might just archive the thread, just because.