but abstractions make for bad branding so a lot of hilarious fluff grew up around the concept, all of it just fucking ridiculous
-
-
Replying to @chaosprime
oh, okay. the way i think of this is with gods as models, just like the ones we have for, say, molecules
2 replies 1 retweet 4 likes -
Replying to @NoraReed @chaosprime
so they mostly explain stuff but then the context gets stripped and you end up going to war with someone because of quantum mechanics
1 reply 0 retweets 6 likes -
Replying to @NoraReed
that's a good avenue of thinking yeah. what i'm saying is that, for example, the Torah is the source code for a god called "is/was/will be"
2 replies 0 retweets 5 likes -
-
Replying to @NoraReed
snow crash is barely even distorting anything for story purposes, our neal knows some shit
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @chaosprime @NoraReed
Ehhhhhhhhhhhhh. He's got really bullshit evopsycho ideas and 90% of what he thinks he knows about linguistics is just wrong.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @adrienneleigh @NoraReed
yeah, the way the snow crash virus winds up working is, uh, heavily dramatized to say the least
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
but he isn't wrong that the human capacity for language is first and foremost an enormous security vulnerability
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @chaosprime @NoraReed
I've always thought that was an incredibly reductive techbro way of looking at language, tbh?
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like
oh, well, could be wabbit. what do you propose in its place?
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.