What does Sup Forums think of ted kaczynski?

Will be posting excerpts from his manifesto ITT:

editions-hache.com/essais/pdf/kaczynski2.pdf

>“Oh!” say the technophiles, “Science is going to
fix all that! We will conquer famine, eliminate psychological
suffering, make everybody healthy and happy!” Yeah,
sure.

>That’s what they said 200 years ago. The Industrial
Revolution was supposed to eliminate poverty, make
everybody happy, etc. The actual result has been quite
different. The technophiles are hopelessly naive (or selfdeceiving)
in their understanding of social problems. They
are unaware of (or choose to ignore) the fact that when
large changes, even seemingly beneficial ones, are introduced
into a society, they lead to a long sequence of other
changes, most of which are impossible to predict (paragraph
103).

>The result is disruption of the society. So it
is very probable that in their attempts to end poverty and
disease, engineer docile, happy personalities and so forth,
the technophiles will create social systems that are terribly
troubled, even more so than the present one.

Other urls found in this thread:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Darwin_among_the_Machines
twitter.com/NSFWRedditVideo

uncle ted is correct on all fronts
/thread

Fucked up the spacing, my bad

Ted on the future on the human race and machines:

If the machines are permitted to make all their
own decisions, we can’t make any conjectures as to the
results, because it is impossible to guess how such machines
might behave. We only point out that the fate of
the human race would be at the mercy of the machines.
It might be argued that the human race would never be
foolish enough to hand over all power to the machines.
But we are suggesting neither that the human race would
voluntarily turn power over to the machines nor that the
machines would willfully seize power. What we do suggest
is that the human race might easily permit itself to
drift into a position of such dependence on the machines
that it would have no practical choice but to accept all of
the machines’ decisions. As society and the problems that
face it become more and more complex and as machines
become more and more intelligent, people will let machines
make more and more of their decisions for them,
simply because machine-made decisions will bring better
results than man-made ones. Eventually a stage may be
reached at which the decisions necessary to keep the system
running will be so complex that human beings will be
incapable of making them intelligently. At that stage the
machines will be in effective control. People won’t be able
to just turn the machine off, because they will be so dependent
on them that turning them off would amount to
suicide.

Don't thread me yet brother

I've read this many times, one of my earliest redpills. I love Ted. All newfags need to read his manifesto

Glad we have other Ted fans here. This is a redpill Sup Forums needs to swallow.

Ted on conservatives:

The conservatives are fools: They whine about the
decay of traditional values, yet they enthusiastically support
technological progress and economic growth. Apparently
it never occurs to them that you can’t make rapid,
drastic changes in the technology and the economy of a
society without causing rapid changes in all other aspects
of the society as well, and that such rapid changes inevitably
break down traditional values.

seriously, if you haven't read his manifesto, read it. It's not long and it's a good read

entirely correct
his only mistake was getting caught

He was based. He knew the program.

Ted on genetically engineered human cattle:

On the other hand it is possible that human control
over the machines may be retained. In that case the average
man may have control over certain private machines
of his own, such as his car or his personal computer,
but control over large systems of machines will be in the
hands of a tiny elite — just as it is today, but with two differences.
Due to improved techniques the elite will have
greater control over the masses; and because human work
will no longer be necessary the masses will be superfluous,
a useless burden on the system. If the elite is ruthless
they may simply decide to exterminate the mass of humanity.
If they are humane they may use propaganda or
other psychological or biological techniques to reduce the
birth rate until the mass of humanity becomes extinct, leaving
the world to the elite. Or, if the elite consists of softhearted
liberals, they may decide to play the role of good
shepherds to the rest of the human race. They will see
to it that everyone’s physical needs are satisfied, that all
children are raised under psychologically hygienic conditions,
that everyone has a wholesome hobby to keep him
busy, and that anyone who may become dissatisfied undergoes
“treatment” to cure his “problem.” Of course, life
will be so purposeless that people will have to be biologically
or psychologically engineered either to remove their
need for the power process or to make them “sublimate”
their drive for power into some harmless hobby. These engineered
human beings may be happy in such a society,
but they most certainly will not be free. They will have
been reduced to the status of domestic animals.

Does everyone forget that this guy literally blew up innocent people?

fpbp.

You know he wrote a 2nd book, ill link if interest

Ted on the "technophiles":

The technophiles are taking us all on an utterly
reckless ride into the unknown. Many people understand
something of what technological progress is doing to us
yet take a passive attitude toward it because they think
it is inevitable. But we (FC) don’t think it is inevitable.
We think it can be stopped, and we will give here some
indications of how to go about stopping it.

He was a delusional retard. I hope he gets nigger dick shoved up his ass.

What was he delusional about?

Ted on dignity vs death:

In the second place, one has to balance struggle
and death against the loss of freedom and dignity. To
many of us, freedom and dignity are more important than
a long life or avoidance of physical pain. Besides, we all
have to die some time, and it may be better to die fighting
for survival, or for a cause, than to live a long but empty
and purposeless life.

(((Kaczynski))), /pol does know his 'religious' upbringing, right /pol????

Ted on current sufferings:

9. In the third place, it is not at all certain that survival
of the system will lead to less suffering than breakdown
of the system would. The system has already caused,
and is continuing to cause, immense suffering all
over the world. Ancient cultures, that for hundreds of
years gave people a satisfactory relationship with each
other and with their environment, have been shattered
by contact with industrial society, and the result has been
a whole catalogue of economic, environmental, social and
psychological problems. One of the effects of the intrusion
of industrial society has been that over much of the world
traditional controls on population have been thrown out
of balance. Hence the population explosion, with all that
that implies. Then there is the psychological suffering that
is widespread throughout the supposedly fortunate countries
of the West (see paragraphs 44, 45). No one knows
what will happen as a result of ozone depletion, the greenhouse
effect and other environmental problems that cannot
yet be foreseen. And, as nuclear proliferation has
shown, new technology cannot be kept out of the hands
of dictators and irresponsible Third World nations. Would
you like to speculate about what Iraq or North Korea will
do with genetic engineering?

Uncle ted was right

im right there with you i literally jerk off to the unabomber manifesto and i piss on urinal cakes with mark zuckerberg and instagram whores faces on them

your formatting is fucking god-awful by the way

What is this suppose to mean?

Sorry

I didn't witness it personally. If it happened today...?

What are you talking? He literally killed some poor working computer shop owner with a nail bomb. The guy was a complete dickhead.

Miles Mathis' essay on this dude is well worth checking out.

You didn't get my point. I know the story well.
I could drive to the location where his cabin was in a couple hours. I lived about 45 minutes from there when they busted him.

When the day of the rope comes can we rescue him?

I think he's a very interesting person. Mindless technological/scientific progress will obviously lead to the end of anything resembling 'humanity', this is by far the biggest problem we face, and it's become much more pertinent in recent decades. Lots of people get too defensive about their own excessively comfortable, consumeristic, gadget filled lives - paid for by their meaningless jobs - to really give it an objective look.

Sadly I do think he's mistaken in regards to mankind's ability to stop its advance. I just can't see a way it can happen. I think the best I can hope for is some land that's far from anything else to live self sufficiency on.

Something related, written in 1863, that I found interesting: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Darwin_among_the_Machines

"The upshot is simply a question of time, but that the time will come when the machines will hold the real supremacy over the world and its inhabitants is what no person of a truly philosophic mind can for a moment question.....War to the death should be instantly proclaimed against them. Every machine of every sort should be destroyed by the well-wisher of his species. Let there be no exceptions made, no quarter shown; let us at once go back to the primeval condition of the race."

Why the sudden interest in Ted? This is like to 2nd or 3rd thread i've seen of this guy in the past 3 hours.

I've always saw his point in the manifesto. Didn't agree about killing if he did it.
The onrush of AI now and the event of the singularity is more in the talk of the day and that may be what is bring him to the forefront for discussion.

*bringing