Re:Snapchat’s Influencers Are Fleeing to Instagram for Money
by sfifs on Wednesday September 13, 2017 @09:07AM
(#15237851)
“There are only two industries. This has always been true,” said Madame Ping, enfolding a lovely porcelain teacup in her withered fingers, the two-inch fingernails interleaving neatly like the pinions of a raptor folding its wings after a long hard day of cruising the thermals. “There is the industry of things, and the industry of entertainment. The industry of things comes first. It keeps us alive. But making things is easy now that we have the Feed. This is not a very interesting business anymore. “After people have the things they need to live, everything else is entertainment.
[ Parent
| on HN ]
Re:Snapchat’s Influencers Are Fleeing to Instagram for Money
by dredmorbius on Wednesday September 13, 2017 @11:50AM
(#15239441)
Diamond Age?
Re:Snapchat’s Influencers Are Fleeing to Instagram for Money
by sfifs on Wednesday September 13, 2017 @08:55PM
(#15244118)
Yup :-)
Re:Snapchat’s Influencers Are Fleeing to Instagram for Money
by dredmorbius on Wednesday September 13, 2017 @10:08PM
(#15244495)
Damned good book. Though I disagree with Mme. Ping here.
Funny for a book that's so rooted in tribes and tribalism that Stephenson didn't go with the classic cultural castes.
Roughly: Labourer, farmer, gatherer (forestry, fishes, herds, hunting), trades & crafts, merchant, warrior, priest (now includes teaching and science, also, arguably, storytellers), rulers. I get about eight out of that, off the top of my head.
Five of those are "things" (the first set). There's a case which might be made for priests and rulers as entertainment / storytelling, but I don't think I could put warriors there.
Which is an interesting omission given the Colonel's role in the story -- clearly Warrior. (Though also, given his media screens, very much taken with Story. Hrm....)