The major stevenson trope seems to me to be the single person or small group that is wise to tech or science, overcoming large, tech based adversaries who are blind to their vulnerabilities. What is his theory of why large organizations are so bad at managing the low level tech, or is it just a literary device that does not hold true in practice? I think it's it's largely the latter. It's hard to write a compelling story about a giant organization, but easier to write one about a small group where you've got different personalities interacting with each other and getting to know them as individuals.
If you want to speculate on the development of tech, no one has a better brain to pick than Neal Stephenson. Across more than a dozen books, he’s created vast story worlds driven by futuristic technologies that have both prophesied and even provoked real-world progress in crypto, social networks, and the creation of the web itself. Though Stephenson insists he’s more often wrong than right, his technical sharpness has even led to a half-joking suggestion that he might be Satoshi Nakamoto, the shadowy creator of bitcoin. His latest novel, Fall; or, Dodge in Hell, involves a more literal sort of brain-picking, exploring what might happen when digitized brains can find a second existence in a virtual afterlife.
So what’s the implicit theology of a simulated world? Might we be living in one, and does it even matter? Stephenson joins Tyler to discuss the book and more, including the future of physical surveillance, how clothing will evolve, the kind of freedom you could expect on a Mars colony, whether today’s media fragmentation is trending us towards dystopia, why the Apollo moon landings were communism’s greatest triumph, whether we’re in a permanent secular innovation starvation, Leibniz as a philosopher, Dickens and Heinlein as writers, and what storytelling has to do with giving good driving directions.
Read a full transcript enhanced with helpful links.
Recorded June 14th, 2019 Other ways to connect