this post was submitted on 21 Mar 2024
90 points (98.9% liked)

the_dunk_tank

15897 readers
1 users here now

It's the dunk tank.

This is where you come to post big-brained hot takes by chuds, libs, or even fellow leftists, and tear them to itty-bitty pieces with precision dunkstrikes.

Rule 1: All posts must include links to the subject matter, and no identifying information should be redacted.

Rule 2: If your source is a reactionary website, please use archive.is instead of linking directly.

Rule 3: No sectarianism.

Rule 4: TERF/SWERFs Not Welcome

Rule 5: No ableism of any kind (that includes stuff like libt*rd)

Rule 6: Do not post fellow hexbears.

Rule 7: Do not individually target other instances' admins or moderators.

Rule 8: The subject of a post cannot be low hanging fruit, that is comments/posts made by a private person that have low amount of upvotes/likes/views. Comments/Posts made on other instances that are accessible from hexbear are an exception to this. Posts that do not meet this requirement can be posted to !shitreactionariessay@lemmygrad.ml

Rule 9: if you post ironic rage bait im going to make a personal visit to your house to make sure you never make this mistake again

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
 

I haven't seen so much effort put into a set in years. This would decent if it wasn't so damn propogandistic. Of course the message is "communism hates science".

From the Netflix science-fiction series Three Body Problem

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Frank@hexbear.net 47 points 1 year ago (32 children)

I couldn't say, I don't really watch tv and have no basis of comparison. But i do want to take this opportunity to slag tbp - the "Dark Forest" is lazy thinking that reflects contemporary geopolitics, and not even that very well. It's tech-bro silliness. The problems of trying to blow up another planet across interstellar distances is so vast the author doesn't even try to make it seem feasible, he just made up a bunch of ridiculous magic excuse "technology" to make the plot work. And the plot is just "wot if nature was red in tooth and claw? Make's you think! Doesn't it?" Just reductionist social darwinist bullshit. "The optimal and indeed only survival action is to kill literally everyone you encounter the moment you encounter them!" Is silly bullshit. It doesn't work in nature, it doesn't work on Earth, and it is not meaningfully possible across interstellar distances with any technology that doesn't rely on magical thinking to function.

[–] TrashGoblin@hexbear.net 28 points 1 year ago (6 children)

It's relatively easy to blow up another planet across interstellar distances, as long as you accept that 1) it will take thousands of years to accomplish, and 2) you will never possibly see any benefit from it.

I'm much more in line with Posadas on the motivations of aliens capable of interstellar travel; there really is no reason to take the Dark Forest seriously as a solution to the Fermi Paradox. The thing that annoys me the most about The Three Body Problem is that the aliens have "a wizard did it" levels of technology, but can't solve their survival problem in their own star system or find uninhabited star systems to terraform. It's all just "how do we justify interstellar invasion in a novel now that we know interstellar invasion is impossible and/or not worthwhile". Like you say, it's contrived.

[–] tocopherol@lemmy.dbzer0.com 18 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

It’s all just “how do we justify interstellar invasion in a novel now that we know interstellar invasion is impossible and/or not worthwhile”. Like you say, it’s contrived.

I think the author would agree with this sentence lol, I've read nearly everything Liu Cixin has written that's been translated into English, he did say somewhere that sci-fi wouldn't be interesting if it was about what was the likely thing to happen. He said he doesn't believe the stories he writes are possible or likely, but just a way to explore different concepts.

load more comments (5 replies)
load more comments (30 replies)