Thanks :)
The more the merrier. I will check it out sometime if I find the time.
37
Why hasn’t wizarding tech been privatized and sold to Muggles yet? Or has it already … (alternate Wiz-Tech-Timeline)
(i.imgur.com)
cross-posted from: https://diagonlemmy.social/post/6753
Alternative Harry Potter narrative: since the global wizarding wars, many attempts were made by companies to sell their tech to Muggles. It was tolerated by the institute of Magic as long as it was not advertised as such. Above is an example of a banned, confiscated attempt to show the magic more openly. However, over time it turned out that Muggles weren’t even interested in the magic behind it, they wanted their devices easy to use and understand; and everyone else eventually joined the wizards and witches.
Eventually, all regulations to sell magical devices were erased and since the late 80s with the introduction of the world wide web, the rise of wiz-tech has only increased in pace: next came the introduction of the iPhone by young wizard Steve Jobs, introducing wiz-tech to the broad public and lately, even magic itself can be channelled through so-called AI agents and the Floo-Network begins to open up to Muggles as well with the Fediverse.
However, with the rise of bad effects that came with it, too, some Muggles are becoming more and more weary of the whole situation and in the wizarding community, people are calling for bringing their knowledge to the Muggles, taking some responsibility beyond their own magical realm, while others call for the institute to again take a stronger stance on the devices in the muggle world due to the negative effects they caused.
How can a good future for both the wizarding and the muggle world look like?
1
Why hasn’t wizarding tech been privatized and sold to Muggles yet? Or has it already … (alternate Wiz-Tech-Timeline)
(i.imgur.com)
Alternative Harry Potter narrative: since the global wizarding wars, many attempts were made by companies to sell their tech to Muggles. It was tolerated by the institute of Magic as long as it was not advertised as such. Above is an example of a banned, confiscated attempt to show the magic more openly. However, over time it turned out that Muggles weren’t even interested in the magic behind it, they wanted their devices easy to use and understand; and everyone else eventually joined the wizards and witches.
Eventually, all regulations to sell magical devices were erased and since the late 80s with the introduction of the world wide web, the rise of wiz-tech has only increased in pace: next came the introduction of the iPhone by young wizard Steve Jobs, introducing wiz-tech to the broad public and lately, even magic itself can be channelled through so-called AI agents and the Floo-Network begins to open up to Muggles as well with the Fediverse.
However, with the rise of bad effects that came with it, too, some Muggles are becoming more and more weary of the whole situation and in the wizarding community, people are calling for bringing their knowledge to the Muggles, taking some responsibility beyond their own magical realm, while others call for the institute to again take a stronger stance on the devices in the muggle world due to the negative effects they caused.
How can a good future for both the wizarding and the muggle world look like?
diagonlemmy.social
Thanks for the tips, they are very helpful.
I think I will exclude "queer friendly" again. It raises some false promises that I think I cannot hold. I like the term “no tolerance towards transphobia”.
When you say “queer friendly”, are you, the admin of the instance, gender diverse and thus directly impacted by Rowling’s transphobia?
No, I'm not. With "queer friendly" I wanted to signal my good intentions here. I don't want to call it a safe space, because I'm not able and also not willing to provide this. Possibly in the future there will be other H.P. instances that are also safe(r) spaces.
So yeah, "queer friendly" is more like a ideal/commitment that I want to try to hold rather than a promise/claim. Or that what was I tried to do here.
If you have a different phrase that could reflect this more accuratly, I will be happy to consider it.
Ok thanks :)
Did this even went through?
If it would be that easy, yes. But you ignore that H.P. does have a cultural value to it. Now you could try to re-build this, but first of all: it will be pretty hard to come up with something that no one feels offended by. And second of all: it will be pretty hard to come up with something that is equally popular.
For me, this is about post-structuralism vs. structuarlism. The current zeigeist is all about "deconstruction", but if you de-construct everything, you are left with nothing. You need to build something new and that structure will always leave some room to deconstruct.
So I'm for leaving some of these cultural structures even if they are in parts worth overcoming. In case of the social web, which the Fediverse tries to create: it will not work without some kind of cultural structure on which it is build. People don't want to spent time in a non-place, the Metaverse already failed because of that (at least its first try).
Post-structuralism is bad. Its anti-liberal and currently a big problem on the left imo.