Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[FallacyofUrist]

New hypothetical: Tiny superpowers!

A tenth of the population suddenly gains tiny superpowers. Think "one pound of telekinesis", "target hears imaginary music for a few seconds", "self-destruct target cell phone, 1 day cooldown". How does this impact society?

Variation: Only members of Bay 12 gained the powers, but all of them did. Someone who joins Bay 12 henceforth does not gain a power, but someone who deletes their account loses their power. Does this have differences from the above scenario?

[Egan_BW]

Toady starts a little justice league and bans anyone who doesn't join.

[MetalSlimeHunt]

Within one month the most reckless and foolish of our members provide a clear enough data trail to identify that people on Bay 12 were given superpowers. We are henceforth almost all kidnapped and experimented on by various intelligence agencies, with people outside nations allied to the United States having the best chance at escaping. They will likely fruitlessly attempt to replicate our abilities to the point of torture.

Worst case scenario: Biological immortality is invented in the 21st century and we are indefinitely kept in blacksites constantly being cut up in scientific experiments.

Best case scenario: Fevered investigations into the nature of Bay 12 lead to the accidental destruction of the server rack and thus everybody's accounts. We are all most likely executed to protect state secrets.

Most best case scenario: I immediately drop off the grid when I realize what's happening and find a way to bootstrap my power into world conquest, freeing some of you along the way and gaining your service by offering you acceptance and power.

[scriver]

World Conquest, one exploded mobile phone per day at a time.

[FallacyofUrist]

New hypothetical: You can choose to remove, permanently, one concept from every human being's mind... except yours and seven other randomly selected human beings. Would you choose to do so, and if so, what concept?

[Trekkin]

New hypothetical: You can choose to remove, permanently, one concept from every human being's mind... except yours and seven other randomly selected human beings. Would you choose to do so, and if so, what concept?

Yes: morality. Remove the idea that "good" and "evil" are anything other than cognitive shortcuts to stop us having to think through the consequences of our actions, and with it goes the idea that some propositions are unthinkable or some positions must be accepted axiomatically. Rather than whiny opining about what we (or, generally, everyone else) "should" do or smarmy appeals to "principles", let us instead accept that we do as we wish, and instead focus on what is likely to get us what we want and with what side effects.

[scriver]

So basically you want to replace morality with... morality. Okay, makes sense.

[Helgoland]

The notion of absolute truth. People would immediately understand the scientific method, and we'd quickly find ways to deal with all the PoMo weirdness. Also folks' communication skills would improve since they'd no longer assume the other person thinks the same way they do.

[MetalSlimeHunt]

The notion of absolute truth. People would immediately understand the scientific method, and we'd quickly find ways to deal with all the PoMo weirdness. Also folks' communication skills would improve since they'd no longer assume the other person thinks the same way they do.

The year is 2038. It has been 21 years since the beginning of the Grand Malaise, though now most know it as the Suicide Plague. The human race now stands at 2.3 billion members, with a global average fertility rate of 0.15. It has been 18 years since mainstream politicians began accepting endorsements from the Voluntary Human Extinction Movement. It has been 12 years since the cults were legalized, and 9 since they were granted public education exclusivity. It has been 4 years since emergency services were formally pulled from rural areas. It has been 1 year since the production of alcohol was outlawed.

The only fields which are experiencing growth are reality show production, weapons sales, and formal philosophy.

[Reelya]

The real problem is that removing any concept is the same as removing any emotion from a human. The idea of removing "fear" from a person sounds great - they'll be brave from now on. Until they start sticking their hands in a fire because they aren't concerned about the consequences. Think about what car travel / pedestrians would be like if nobody had the concept of fear?

Personally, I think removing something as big as the concept of truth from the minds of all humans would have a similar-level effect to that. "Truth" is the sense of that something can be known, e.g. that it can be predicted, and since it can be predicted, you can fall back on heuristics to quickly determine what's compatible with that. With no sense of truth, humans would become a race of neurotics. e.g. people would wake up and lie in bed because they can't be sure life outside bed exists. They wouldn't put shoes on because shoes could just be an illusion. You'd have to have that debate every morning. Because when you take away "absolute truth" it is taken away for the big questions, but also the small question that we normally don't ask.

So you definitely don't want to mess with things by removing a core part of human psychology that people use to navigate the world unless you want a disaster world where nobody can function at a basic level of normality. You want to remove one more or less useless concept which also causes problems. "Tribalism" which underlies patriotism/nationalism/bigotry would be my choice. However, then the consequences would be that groups aren't cohesive, e.g. things like special interest clubs wouldn't be stable since members wouldn't feel the need to associate with other members more than with a random person they don't know. Still less disruptive than removing "truth" but with most of the benefits.

The notion of absolute truth. People would immediately understand the scientific method, and we'd quickly find ways to deal with all the PoMo weirdness. Also folks' communication skills would improve since they'd no longer assume the other person thinks the same way they do.

Well you can say that, but just removing the concept of truth doesn't mean people would understand jack shit, sorry to say. They might as easily turn to scrying magical chicken guts or something. Then if the reading is disliked, read more chicken guts until you get one you like. Then you turn around and say "go for the scientific method it's better than chicken guts!" and they go "oh really? well that's just one theory".

[Dunamisdeos]

I want to remove the notion that a Furby can be anything other than intrinsically terrifying.

[FallacyofUrist]

New hypothetical: You can make it so that all games on Steam are and will forever be free for you and you only with no repercussions, in exchange for causing all movies and television programs to be invisible and inaudible to your eyes. Would you do so?

Double new hypothetical: You receive a magic calendar in the mail. It lists three future dates and events attached to them: November 19, 2020, invention of 50% reliable perfect cancer cure, January 3 2059, asteroid approaches earth and has a 20% chance of hitting and causing the apocalypse, March 5 2070, the Singularity. The calendar's magic allows you to either erase one of the dates from occurrence or move two of the dates either closer to or further from now. What would you do?

[Reelya]

I would certainly not do that. Free steam games isn't worth losing all other major media. Because I can earn money to get the steam games I want, plus there isn't enough time to play them all, and most of them suck anyway. Whereas not being able to see any tv, movies or anime would not be something fixable with money.

As for the second one it's not very balanced.

-  November 19, 2020, invention of 50% reliable perfect cancer cure (good thing, soon) - not worth removing or advancing
- January 3 2059, asteroid approaches earth and has a 20% chance of hitting and causing the apocalypse (bad thing, distant) - worth removing
- March 5 2070, the Singularity (good thing, distant) - worth advancing

So the question really boils down to just whether you'd prefer to advance the date of the singularity decades earlier, or remove a 20% chance of Earth being destroyed before that. In terms of preparing for the worst-case scenario you'd remove the asteroid completely. A few extra years of singularity isn't worth a 20% chance of destroying the Earth.

[Egan_BW]

Now, if I wanted to play every game for free while keeping access to other media I could just be a remorseless pirate. And taking that deal is gonna look mighty silly if Steam ever shuts down.

For the other one, suppose I'd shove the singularity to tomorrow and the asteroid to the same day that the earth is going to be destroyed by the sun expanding. That seems to maximize the chance of humanity surviving. "Singularity" is a pretty vague term, of course.

[Reelya]

Heh, I assumed the time-moving would be a reasonable amount myself. However if there's no limit on how far you can move things, you're right! Why not make the asteroid it 10 trillion years away and the singularity tomorrow?