Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

SoylentNews is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop. Only 18 submissions in the queue.
posted by Fnord666 on Monday November 18 2019, @11:49AM   Printer-friendly
from the Wait-long-enough-and-sc-fi-always-becomes-sci-fact dept.

In 1951 Isaac Asimov inflicted psychohistory on the world with the Foundation Trilogy. Now, thanks to data sets going back more than 2,500 years, scientists have discovered the rules underlying the rise and fall of civilizations, after examining more than 400 such historical societies crash and burn - or in some cases avoid crashing. More here:

https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2019/nov/12/history-as-a-giant-data-set-how-analysing-the-past-could-help-save-the-future

Turchin's approach to history, which uses software to find patterns in massive amounts of historical data, has only become possible recently, thanks to the growth in cheap computing power and the development of large historical datasets. This "big data" approach is now becoming increasingly popular in historical disciplines. Tim Kohler, an archaeologist at Washington State University, believes we are living through "the glory days" of his field, because scholars can pool their research findings with unprecedented ease and extract real knowledge from them. In the future, Turchin believes, historical theories will be tested against large databases, and the ones that do not fit – many of them long-cherished – will be discarded. Our understanding of the past will converge on something approaching an objective truth.

Discuss. Or throw rocks.


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 2) by Phoenix666 on Tuesday November 19 2019, @05:59PM (4 children)

    by Phoenix666 (552) on Tuesday November 19 2019, @05:59PM (#922016) Journal

    I completely agree with you. In a capitalist, competitive economy there would be no monopolies because market entrants would constantly challenge the status quo trying to get a slice of that sweet, rent-seeking pie. But they don't because we don't live in a capitalist society, but a crony capitalist society which is what can rightly be called "socialism by the rich." In other words, they use government to prevent new market entrants or any one of dozens of other dirty tricks to preserve their rent-seeking monopolies.

    It makes me cranky.

    At this point I am so disgusted with the discursive clusterfuck that critical inquiry has become, so exasperated with the endless circlejerk of the false dichotomy of socialism vs. capitalism, that I want to walkaway down a DIY path I call FOALMA (Fuck Off And Leave Me Alone).

    --
    Washington DC delenda est.
    Starting Score:    1  point
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  

    Total Score:   2  
  • (Score: 2) by Azuma Hazuki on Wednesday November 20 2019, @02:52AM (3 children)

    by Azuma Hazuki (5086) on Wednesday November 20 2019, @02:52AM (#922234) Journal

    Amazing how adult wisdom looks a lot like being completely out of fucks to give, isn't it?

    --
    I am "that girl" your mother warned you about...
    • (Score: 3, Insightful) by barbara hudson on Wednesday November 20 2019, @06:46PM (2 children)

      by barbara hudson (6443) <barbara.Jane.hudson@icloud.com> on Wednesday November 20 2019, @06:46PM (#922519) Journal
      That would be the end result of a communist society. In capitalist societies, you charge for fucks, you don't just give them away :-)

      Today's high degree of ennui is symptomatic of societies near the breakdown point, as people feel that "the system " no longer works for them. That's why higher levels of inequality are so damaging, and so dangerous. Unfortunately, as the researchers point out, the ones who benefit are effectively insulated from the consequences and tend not to realize the problems before it's too late to take effective measures, so they end up suffering the consequences. Including violent dispossession of their wealth, status, freedom, even life.

      The NRA is going to regret all that lobbying against gun control.

      --
      SoylentNews is social media. Says so right in the slogan. Soylentnews is people, not tech.
      • (Score: 2) by Azuma Hazuki on Wednesday November 20 2019, @11:53PM (1 child)

        by Azuma Hazuki (5086) on Wednesday November 20 2019, @11:53PM (#922711) Journal

        So why is it only people like us can see this? Or is it that others do and refuse to admit it?

        I have a hypothesis that being out of the norm in very personal ways--you trans, me lesbian and from poverty for example--tends to make us 1) think harder about things on a systems level, if only to understand why we've suffered so, and 2) have more compassion for others who suffer.

        --
        I am "that girl" your mother warned you about...
        • (Score: 2) by barbara hudson on Thursday November 21 2019, @01:21AM

          by barbara hudson (6443) <barbara.Jane.hudson@icloud.com> on Thursday November 21 2019, @01:21AM (#922766) Journal
          Probably because when you're forced to challenge basic assumptions, you're forced to think for yourself. It's like racism - I tell people we were too poor to afford the racist module growing up (though it turns out that racism flourishes even among people who grew up in poor, ethnically diverse communities. Turns out people who are having the boots put to them like to do the same to those further down the pecking order. Lack of introspective and empathetic capacity, coupled with declines in neuroplasticity because they are not constantly challenging themselves and who they are). Or just intellectual laziness - not asking "why" often enough.

          As for sexual orientation, one of these days I really need to sit down and address that, because it's something I have been putting on the back burner for a couple of decades - my life has just been too complicated ever since I transitioned. As an atheist, all I can say is thank $DIETY I'm not into cats - there are too many crazy cat ladies already :-)

          One thing I noticed is that since transition I interact far more often with other women than with men - there really is a sisterhood (though when I mentioned it, one of my sisters denied it exists, guess she's never experienced it, but it kicks in when I need it - we support each other in ways men can't even imagine).

          It's one of the things I cite when people ask me if I'd ever consider going back to being a guy (not really a physical possibility, but people ask). Why would I want to be someone else again? The loss of male privilege was itself liberating, because I could no longer use that as a social crutch, I guess.

          --
          SoylentNews is social media. Says so right in the slogan. Soylentnews is people, not tech.