Apr 05, 2020 12:41 AM
Decima and mind control utopia L in Milliways
+ Show First Post
Total: 101
Posts Per Page:
Permalink

"Do you have interest in a description of my world as well?" she asks when the other has returned.

Permalink

"Sure."

Permalink

She's done some reading on different worlds and has some amount of a guess of which things to focus on as needing explanation.

"People of my world are generally born with different quantities of a quality we call neur-potential. It allows for mind control of other people, and also of computers, though somewhat differently.

- Does your world have computer technology?"

Permalink

"Yeah. Have for I guess half a century."

Permalink

Then she won't stop to explain it.

"As I think is fairly apparent, the ability has a very high potential for misuse, with a variety of severe consequences. The founders of our society fled their own society - possibly world - of origin, and avoiding this was among their central priorities. We control no one against their will; we expose no one to control who would not wish to be, we permit no misuse in individual basis."  

Permalink

"How is that enforced?"

Permalink

"Varies with setting - we have a variety, people come in different sorts. I'm from a city with a background flow and the protections are incorporated. In some settings there's surveillance, in some the option to use neur-potential on others is adjusted to be unavailable. A few others.

Permalink

"Setting?"

Permalink

She notes this as information about the local translation.

"Those born in our world have a variety of often quite significant preferences with respect to the use of neur-potential on or around them. I don't prefer to be subject to it myself, but the city I live in has a background flow and I find that acceptable - and convenient. Many of course like to be more tied in. Some others prefer not to be around a background flow, or too many people tied into one. Some don't prefer the flow but appreciate the potential for occasionally receiving commands if they desire them. Some prefer to be around no uses at all. 

A given location in our world is generally set up in one of several ways, each of which is suited to some of these preferences and not others. We have some language to refer to this; I suppose it's only to be expected the relevant lexical items would not be needed elsewhere."

Permalink

"Background flow?"

Permalink

She'd obtained materials on some other worlds with forms of mind control, earlier, noted some differences in characteristics.  

"In controlling computers, neur-potential can simply be used to produce actions; in people its use tends to involve mindstate change. A mindstate change doesn't require immediate commands attached - can cause the state and leave it for later, so to speak. With enough neur-potential and knowing what to do with it, you can make a background flow - generally mindstate-oriented, people can vary their connection to it, vary their absorption - or have it varied for them."

Permalink

"So if you have a background flow that makes you feel relaxed, you'll feel more relaxed if you're connected to it?"

Permalink

"Yes. And more relaxed if more connected, generally."

Permalink

"Can it control actions, or just mind states?"

Permalink

"Can work in either manner. Though a basics level background flow isn't particularly ideal for actions unless you need everyone performing the same one. Ours is more personalized - and more complicated, this is some of what takes approximately the most work.

We have the flow, but we - you could say bounce it around more, tie more into it. Split it up more, identify to it." She taps her pendant. "Directions to some unit can go out to them and not everyone in the city, and the Acentered don't get all the Leader feelings they're not at all interested in, and if someone needs conflict help or whatever other thing they're the ones who get it."

Permalink

"Who's 'we'?"

Permalink

"My society of origin.

Not generally myself personally, I'm a researcher. Primarily."

Permalink

"Who're the Acentered, then?"

Permalink

"Some people who like being tied in more like having a Leader to focus on; some don't. Acentered are the second of those; they'll think 'serving the city' and not 'serving the Leader' and such. Generally not different from each other otherwise." 

Permalink

"So Leaders do - what?"

Permalink

A motion of sorts. "Leadership. 

I don't imagine it's that different from the sort of thing whoever is in charge do in other sorts of societies.

Once the door allows me to leave again I'll be passing her a message about this place - it's important enough for that, obviously; she'll coordinate making decisions and doing what should be done about it."

Permalink

"Why would people focus on a leader then? I'm not used to most people much liking their politicians."

Permalink

"That sounds rather more unpleasant but perhaps it's likely to happen if they're less selected." 

Shrug. "I haven't questioned anyone in detail. They prefer it as a focus? The Leader watches over them and it all runs and they serve the Leader.

As I'm given to understand it some people prefer a single partner in their personal life; perhaps it can be considered similar to that."

Permalink

"Most people don't serve their partner all that much, either."

Permalink

A slight laugh. "We do have some with that particular preference but it's not especially common, no. 

The comparison was the single focused interest, not the service. Most people who wish to be tied into or absorbed in the flow go for the serving frame. Not all, but that's not overly relevant to Leadered as opposed to Acentered; the distributions differ there but it's just proportions."

Total: 101
Posts Per Page: