"DO and MJ: Imbroglio"
Extra special thanks to Ghost, who provided the plot and dialogue.
I was remembering something from several years ago. I was on a bus and there was a baby crying. The baby’s mother was doing that thing parents do, rubbing the baby’s back and moving it up and down and so on, but the baby was inconsolable. Eventually the mother and baby left the bus, and a few people seemed to breathe inaudible sighs of relief.
But one woman in particular, who had seemed particularly annoyed, immediately exclaimed, “Man!” and went on to complain about the mother and baby for a minute.
I didn’t get it. What could the mother have done? What could the baby have done? Sometimes babies cry, and sometimes parents really can’t do anything about it. It’s just a fact of life. I’m not fond of hearing babies scream for no discernible reason, but I understand that that’s just how babies communicate because they don’t know any better yet. This lady, on the other hand, could go gormandize a phallus. She was straight-up being annoying on purpose, and it was well within her power to shut the hell up because seriously she was way more annoying than the baby.
This brought to mind another event around that same time period during which I overheard these two people talking. One was talking about his kid, or something, and how the kid is hard to take care of and doesn’t always do what he says, and the other person said something like, “Ugh, they’re terrible. Just hit them.”
Again I didn’t get it. What would that accomplish? No, that question was rhetorical. I know the answer. It would possibly make the kid do what the parent wanted out of fear. Or maybe not, maybe the kid would start crying due to being injured by someone like ten times stronger for a reason beyond comprehension. Because that’s the whole point. Kids don’t understand. Hitting them doesn’t help them understand either, it just makes them unhappy and afraid and leads to trust issues. I would know, believe me. The idea that hitting children is somehow important for their development is a definite misconception carried on through generations of compounding stupidity and laziness, much like how racism and sexism are carried on.
But I don’t feel like writing about this, just take a class on developmental psychology if you care. Anyway I forgot the point I was making.
Fill in the blanks and tag 6 people! (don’t forget to tell them you’ve tagged them) : Yeah I’m not tagging anyone.
Birthday: March 13.
Favourite colour: Eternity.
Lucky number: (Secret).
Height: I’m not sure, I think 5 foot 8 inches or something.
Talents: Who knows???
Last dream you remember: I fractionally remember many dreams, most of which are not recent, so I’m not sure how to answer this question.
Can you juggle: Nope.
Do you like writing: I like having written, if that counts.
Do you like dancing: I can’t dance.
Do you like singing: Or sing.
Dream vacation: I have no idea.
Dream guy/gal: Jasmine.
Dream wedding: I honestly have never had a dream about a wedding.
Dream pet: Cat I guess? Why would that be a dream though?
Dream job: Omnipotent god.
Favourite movie: Hard to say. How about… Plinkett’s review of Star Wars episode 3.
Favourite book series: The Pendergast series. But my favorite book is Neverwhere, it’s just not part of a series.
Last movie you saw: Uhh. I don’t know. Something I saw with Jasmine.
Least favourite book: I dunno some history book probably.
Least favourite food: Onions, maybe?
Least favourite author: .
Hair colour: Yes.
Eye colour: Yes.
Biggest turn-on: Whoa, this is none of your business!
Biggest turn-off: ???
Imagine this scenario. A whole bunch of people get these magic wands.
But this isn’t happy fun magic, this is evil death magic. The wands aren’t as good at killing as guns are, but every year they kill over 30,000 people, with 3,000 of them being innocent bystanders. Nobody is safe around the wand-users. People may not die immediately but just being exposed to the magic can make them very sick (and, hence weakened, more susceptible to death later).
What am I describing here? Can you guess?
It’s something that is real. Specifically, cigarettes. And I was understating it because I like nicely even and poetic numbers.
There is no reason for public smoking to be legal. None at all.
If you want to suck on a stick and get lung cancer, whatever. Be my guest. But don’t drag (aha) me into it.
As I grew up, I became more and more certain that the fear of a robot revolution against humanity was an unfounded one, and the idea of machines built by humans turning against humans without that specifically being programmed into them was ridiculous. After all, it doesn’t make sense for a machine to do anything other than what it is programmed to do. A microwave cannot, for instance, display a game of Pong on its display. Normally, anyway. By the same token, androids created to serve man would not Serve Man [to some unspecified entity that actually eats] if its programming consisted entirely of etiquette and protocol.
I realized relatively recently that maybe there’s more to it than that. Obviously a robot with specific programming will only attempt to do what it is programmed to do, but what matters is who is doing the programming. In the potentially-approaching-future, where manufacturing of all kinds is done automatically, this sort of programming could very well be done by other robots. Granted, the source of all the programming is likely to be human, but that initial humanity can easily get lost in the tides of industry and time and efficiency.
I’ll try making up an example right now.
So it starts with, let’s say, Johnny Hope (in-joke, sorry). Hope programs R0001-0001 “Roney” to determine the correct algorithms and so on that will go into the S0001 series, Roney starts with S0001-0001, which is in charge of programming the T0001 series. S0001-0001 starts with T0001-0001, which is in charge of programming the U0001 series…
This seems a little crazy, right? Why have such a long stream of robots whose entire existence is devoted only to programming other robots? Well, I was thinking about it like an assembly line sort of deal, only exponentially more complicated. If humanity ever reaches the technological prowess of being able to make robot-building robots that need little to no human input, that can easily mark the beginning of the end of the species (maybe).
All this potentiality requires is one of two things: either there is a hiccup along the way akin to an evolutionary mutation that gets propagated down the generations and happens to incorporate the endorsement of killing all life, or the machines are developed toward efficiency in their work and they “realize” that the most efficient reality is one without humans getting in the way with their irrationality and biological needs.
Anyway, all that this hypothetical scenario requires is that the humans in charge of all this are lazy enough to not check that everything is running smoothly and stupid enough to not know what to look out for. So with that in mind, yeah sure there could very well be a robot uprising in a distant future.
You wake up one day to darkness. Your claustrophobia sets in slowly, as does your oxygen loss. You’re inside a small wooden box shaped to fit your dimensions.
You hear people talking outside the wood. They are mourning you.
Then you hear your best friend, crying the loudest. She asks you, rhetorically, why you didn’t reblog that one post you did last year.
It takes you a moment to realize what she’s talking about. That post on Tumblr. The one where you told the reader, if you do not reblog it assume you are dead.
I had a thought just a while ago.
My Alexocution entries sometimes have the potential to be really controversial since I tend to type my unadulterated opinions (which can be rather opinionated), but there is no controversy because only like one or few people actually read them.
Now I don’t doubt that some of my opinions are stupid, but others I believe are meaningful, like when I talk about injustices and what is categorized suchly. Like, oh, it’s kind of too bad I didn’t type these words into a more specialized forum, maybe they could help someone make a point somewhere (‘cause I sure as Niflheim ain’t gonna make one).
But then on the other hand, maybe that’s a good thing? I mean, I don’t want to be popular or well-known or anything (at least, not for things like this…), but more importantly it is indicative of the underlying fact that I’m really insignificant in the grand scheme of opinion-speakers. On the other half of this metaphorical globe are other insignificant people with opinions in direct contrast to mine, who advocate blind chauvinism and sexism and other forms of ignorance. They don’t get a public voice either, and if I believed in a spiritual cosmic balance sort of deal that’d all even out.
I don’t of course, but it’s still something I think about. I think I don’t want to be well-known because many other people who are well-known have opinions I really don’t agree with, and I feel like if I were well-known I might get compared to them. This is a silly thing to think, especially since I practically just categorized myself as being in the same bucket as a whole bunch of people whose opinions I don’t agree with (those with no public voice), but at least then nobody has to know about it.
I forgot the point I was making?