You know what I’m talking about. What I want to make very clear is that I think it’s most reasonably referred to as a “what” and an “it” rather than a “who.” It doesn’t operate like a person; a human. It’s never been part of our social fabric, as you can see by reading Lucky Loser. It’s not the only one of its type, but it’s currently the most prominent. We have the language to deal with this sort of apparition: refer to it as an “it.”
About Me
I’m Pete Harbeson, a writer (among other things) located near Boston, Massachusetts. In addition to writing my own content, I’ve learned to translate for my loquacious and opinionated pup Chocolate Bossypaws. No surprise, she mostly speaks in doggerel. You can find her contributions tagged with Chocolatiana.
Check out my other blog, Techlimitics, where I’m grappling with the nature of simplicity. You can also find some of my minor software projects at GitHub. Nothing very impressive. I mostly write tiny utilities in Python.
I find myself suddenly de-corporatized (their choice, not mine). To help keep the lights on, buy me a coffee!
Recent Posts
- Once more, into the breach
- Be Here Now. And Sit.
- Why the fear of dead air?
- But all my friends say I should…
- War games
Categories
Artificial Intelligence
Chocolatiana
Essays
History, sort of
Immorality
Incompetence
Quotations
Resistance
Stories
Tales from the Forest
Technicalities
Tragedy
Unanticipated Consequences