Re: Testing Chat IV: A New Hope
Posted: Sun May 19, 2013 2:24 pm
well obviously I don't know the context, but it just sounds like smalltalk to me
"you said you'd ban me last" "i lied"
https://testingstan.arsdnet.net/forum/
I thought it was the bee's knees.Jung wrote:As long as you don't go into it expecting anything more than a popcorn action movie I'd say it's pretty watchable.evilsoup wrote:anyway, is STD worth watching? I found the first Star Trek reboot to be a completely charmless snorefest (worse that Nemesis, even) and the trailer for STD makes it look pretty terrible. But then, trailers make most films look terrible, so I'd like some opinions of people who've seen the film.
RogueIce wrote:yeah well you like mlp so your opinion is worthless.
I was actually very impressed. It ended up having some of the problems I expected when I heard that one of the villains might be Khan, but it dealt with most of them (at least for those familiar enough with Space Seed and STII, I know exactly why the reviewers hate it though). It also - possibly inadvertently - dealt with some of my criticisms of Trek(2009) by providing a clearer view of the universe.RogueIce wrote:I thought it was the bee's knees.Jung wrote:As long as you don't go into it expecting anything more than a popcorn action movie I'd say it's pretty watchable.evilsoup wrote:anyway, is STD worth watching? I found the first Star Trek reboot to be a completely charmless snorefest (worse that Nemesis, even) and the trailer for STD makes it look pretty terrible. But then, trailers make most films look terrible, so I'd like some opinions of people who've seen the film.
I legit think this is kind of an interesting sociological/literary phenomenon. Any thoughts on it?I wrote:If we're going to talk about Star Trek and surprisingly regressive tendencies in SF, the SF fandom phenomenon of reinterpreting the TNG Federation as some kind of communist dystopia (see: SDN, TGG) seems rather relevant and interesting, because it's hard not to see it as some people who like SF nonetheless seeing an attempt at portraying a radically different and better society and reacting by rebelling against the idea. Like they're cool with the pew pew bigaton whizz bang tech side of SF, but show them speculation about equivalent improvement in the social realm and they want to dismiss it by portraying it as really evil or inferior. I wonder how much of this has to do with said speculation being opposed to certain conservative notions of how the world works, like the idea that liberal democratic capitalism represents the apex of human sociopolitical development and the idea that many of the flaws of society are inevitable results of flawed human nature rather than correctable institutional or cultural problems. It's interesting that it comes down to a Star Wars vs. Star Trek axis, because Star Wars is a great example of "the future will be just like the present, or the past, but in space, with lasers" - and at that where this overlaps with the SW fandom it seems to do so at the portions of the fandom that have a certain admiration for the Empire, rather than seeing it as the fundamentally evil fascist dystopia led by an essentially Satanic figure that we see presented in the movies.
I've always marveled at how the Empire apologists arguments always were in synch with Nazi apologist arguments. That and the fucking weird amount of conservatives who just love ST despite its entire message being contrary to their views. I mean you can't even say well maybe they just like starfleet and its militaristic nature because aside from a few instances, starfleet is and always has been pretty much exploration oriented.Jung wrote:Taken from a post I just wrote on SB:
I legit think this is kind of an interesting sociological/literary phenomenon. Any thoughts on it?I wrote:If we're going to talk about Star Trek and surprisingly regressive tendencies in SF, the SF fandom phenomenon of reinterpreting the TNG Federation as some kind of communist dystopia (see: SDN, TGG) seems rather relevant and interesting, because it's hard not to see it as some people who like SF nonetheless seeing an attempt at portraying a radically different and better society and reacting by rebelling against the idea. Like they're cool with the pew pew bigaton whizz bang tech side of SF, but show them speculation about equivalent improvement in the social realm and they want to dismiss it by portraying it as really evil or inferior. I wonder how much of this has to do with said speculation being opposed to certain conservative notions of how the world works, like the idea that liberal democratic capitalism represents the apex of human sociopolitical development and the idea that many of the flaws of society are inevitable results of flawed human nature rather than correctable institutional or cultural problems. It's interesting that it comes down to a Star Wars vs. Star Trek axis, because Star Wars is a great example of "the future will be just like the present, or the past, but in space, with lasers" - and at that where this overlaps with the SW fandom it seems to do so at the portions of the fandom that have a certain admiration for the Empire, rather than seeing it as the fundamentally evil fascist dystopia led by an essentially Satanic figure that we see presented in the movies.
Well, the Empire is pretty obviously fascist, so that doesn't seem surprising to me. The Imperial apologism phenomenon seems rather interesting to me - I mean, yeah, it's kind of "SF fans often have conservative or regressive and authoritarian tendencies, more on this shocking development at 11", but it also seems like something that might be interesting to probe in more detail than that. What makes somebody take a look at something like the Empire in SW and find it appealing? Is it the aesthetics? The power? The promise of membership in a powerful and agentic band of brothers? The promise of being able to serve something greater than yourself? The offer of protection from people who scare or hurt you by a liberty-destroying dictatorship that will enforce some vision of harmonious social relations on everybody (I suspect this is a big component of nerd authoritarianism)? I suspect there's quite a bit of overlap with the things that draw people to authoritarianism and fascism in RL.Flagg wrote:I've always marveled at how the Empire apologists arguments always were in synch with Nazi apologist arguments.
Yeah, it's a megacrossover on SB and SDN. Though it kind of seems like half the time the authors are mostly using it as an excuse to write about their own personal settings.RogueIce wrote:A super crossover fanfic universe thingy. Duchess could tell you way more about it when she happens by, I'm sure. You can see various stories set in the universe around the Fanfic forum.
You mean this?RogueIce wrote:Also Jung, you should have included stuff about "lol transhumanism ftw" in your post.
I wrote:I'm not sure Star Trek's bioconservative elements were really hypocrisy either; Star Trek is about an optimistic vision of humanity as fundamentally improveable, perhaps perfectable, as is; that humanity's problems are fundamentally a result of lack of knowledge and application of that knowledge. Transhumanism is arguably subversive to that message, because it implies that this better society may have been created by changing human nature, and therefore be fundamentally inaccessible to the humanity of today (except by changing our nature). You can certainly take issue with that perspective, but I don't see how it's inconsistent or hypocritical.
Yes. Because I never want to miss a chance to put down transhumanism.Jung wrote:You mean this?RogueIce wrote:Also Jung, you should have included stuff about "lol transhumanism ftw" in your post.
I wrote:I'm not sure Star Trek's bioconservative elements were really hypocrisy either; Star Trek is about an optimistic vision of humanity as fundamentally improveable, perhaps perfectable, as is; that humanity's problems are fundamentally a result of lack of knowledge and application of that knowledge. Transhumanism is arguably subversive to that message, because it implies that this better society may have been created by changing human nature, and therefore be fundamentally inaccessible to the humanity of today (except by changing our nature). You can certainly take issue with that perspective, but I don't see how it's inconsistent or hypocritical.
Pretty much this and only this, at least for me. Star Destroyers look cool, the uniforms are snazzy and the armored soldier thing is pretty sweet.Jung wrote:What makes somebody take a look at something like the Empire in SW and find it appealing? Is it the aesthetics?
98% of Internet nerds fail to notice any change whatsoever.From tomorrow, humans react strongly to direct sunlight.
Five seconds of direct sunshine cause third degree burns at the exposed areas.
What now? And what do you do now?
Which sentence?Flagg wrote:That sentence is missing the word obliviously.
The ironic thing about that is if you want the Star Wars side to be less evil you could just make it Star Trek vs. the Republic. I'm guessing one of the main reasons it comes down to Federation vs. Empire so much is because the Federation and the Republic aren't really the kind of states that would randomly start fights with each other, whereas the Empire is exactly the kind of state that would invade some peaceful weaker neighbor.Glass Fort MacLeod wrote:Imperial apologism was basically taking the concept that 'the Empire might not be all bad' and then tryin gto translate it into a justifcation that the Empire really wasn't a bad guy.
I've noticed this too. The hating on the Tau is interesting - on paper they seem like the kind of faction people like SB/SDN nerds should like. They're the science and humanism fuck yeah guys, the guttering light of reason and humanism and hope and technocratic efficiency in a vast dark sea of superstition, ignorance, barbarism, and despair (I mean, yeah, you can take issue with this, but the theme is there). You'd think that would be catnip to the kind of people who ate up Salvation War and defend RDA in Avatar.Edit: A better example of both in relation to one another might be looking at how pro-Imperium fans view the Imperium itself, especially when interacting with other franchises/factions both within and without 40K. Esp the Tau. I've noticed that whilst the Imperium is fundamentally a mixed bag 'gray area' sort of thing (its got some good aspects but lots of negative aspects too) alot of the pro-Imperium sorts will try to minimize the negative aspects and over-emphasize the positive ones (to be fair you find this amongst some of the pro-Tau side too) and to an outside observer the tribalism can be very evident.
I don't think nerd human-nationalism is really about species, not at its core.Oxymoron wrote:- The Tau aren't human
Its dangerous to go alone. Here, take this:Oxymoron wrote:I shouldn't have asked the other day if Purple was still on SDN.
'Cause apparently that summoned him.