Be advised: this thread is not for serious in-depth discussion of weighty topics (we have a link for that), this thread is not for anything Culture War related. This thread is for Fun. You got jokes? Share 'em. You got silly questions? Ask 'em.
- 76
- 3
What is this place?
This website is a place for people who want to move past shady thinking and test their ideas in a
court of people who don't all share the same biases. Our goal is to
optimize for light, not heat; this is a group effort, and all commentators are asked to do their part.
The weekly Culture War threads host the most
controversial topics and are the most visible aspect of The Motte. However, many other topics are
appropriate here. We encourage people to post anything related to science, politics, or philosophy;
if in doubt, post!
Check out The Vault for an archive of old quality posts.
You are encouraged to crosspost these elsewhere.
Why are you called The Motte?
A motte is a stone keep on a raised earthwork common in early medieval fortifications. More pertinently,
it's an element in a rhetorical move called a "Motte-and-Bailey",
originally identified by
philosopher Nicholas Shackel. It describes the tendency in discourse for people to move from a controversial
but high value claim to a defensible but less exciting one upon any resistance to the former. He likens
this to the medieval fortification, where a desirable land (the bailey) is abandoned when in danger for
the more easily defended motte. In Shackel's words, "The Motte represents the defensible but undesired
propositions to which one retreats when hard pressed."
On The Motte, always attempt to remain inside your defensible territory, even if you are not being pressed.
New post guidelines
If you're posting something that isn't related to the culture war, we encourage you to post a thread for it.
A submission statement is highly appreciated, but isn't necessary for text posts or links to largely-text posts
such as blogs or news articles; if we're unsure of the value of your post, we might remove it until you add a
submission statement. A submission statement is required for non-text sources (videos, podcasts, images).
Culture war posts go in the culture war thread; all links must either include a submission statement or
significant commentary. Bare links without those will be removed.
If in doubt, please post it!
Rules
- Courtesy
- Content
- Engagement
- When disagreeing with someone, state your objections explicitly.
- Proactively provide evidence in proportion to how partisan and inflammatory your claim might be.
- Accept temporary bans as a time-out, and don't attempt to rejoin the conversation until it's lifted.
- Don't attempt to build consensus or enforce ideological conformity.
- Write like everyone is reading and you want them to be included in the discussion.
- The Wildcard Rule
- The Metarule
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Notes -
Generational financial security first. Secondly, technological advancement for the benefit of humanity.
I'd probably figure out batteries or energy storage in general. Then energy generation. Energy is basically a huge choke point for all sorts of things. Luxury gay space communism social technologies after.
Wish I was more creative, but this is pretty much it.
Batteries may be plausible. Energy is iffy - what if it turns it's actually has to be nuclear? You may be IQ400, but other people still aren't and they are afraid of bad nukular juju, and your IQ400 arguments do not convince them because they can't understand most of it and hate you for that too. A lot of people would hate you - from traditional energy producers all around the world to the woke ecologists that wouldn't be happy with the idea that the solution for everything they thought as a problem is not worshipping Mother Gaia but more technology. I'm not even sure about social things - so far success in doing anything social is correlated negatively if anything with the IQ...
Nuclear is going to come back because it must.
Bad nuclear juju is a matter of propaganda. It's not unsolvable, it's mere perception management. Undoing degrowth scaremongering won't be that hard.
Surely you're aware there has been a big vibe shift on nuclear recently?
A tiny vibe shift I'd say. It'd be a big vibe shift when Congress candidates would dare to speak the name again, this is not happening yet. And given how overregulated everything is, building anything will be prohibitively expensive unless regulators are told to stop their shit. And only lawmakers can do that, and to make them to do that they shouldn't be afraid that they will be blamed for giving us all cancer through bad juju. That part didn't happen yet. So some guys like Microsoft can afford to have private nuclear plants, because they play by different rules anyway, but the rules for normal people so far are the same.
...you should be on twitter.
The vibes for pro-nuclear are very powerful. It's really cringe - nothing has substantially changed, but.. I guess it's the AI energy requirements.
The worst thing I figured out recently is that many, many SF writers -even the ones who aren't environmentalist kooks, even people who do a little math & physics in their books to keep it plausible - those people really swallowed all the hogwash about nuclear reactor accidents / bombs making some place uninhabitable etc.
What hope do we really have when even curious well-read people with 130-140 IQs do not see through the bullshit.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
I'd go for the social technology first. At least, I'd learn enough to make sure I don't become the target of some "evil rich billionaire" campaign preventing the technological progress I'd do later, or that I don't become part of a conspiracy theory claiming I'm an alien, lizard or something else wacky for inventing a bunch of stuff and getting rich super fast.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link