Inbetweeners 27- Mobius, Celeste, and Nimbus Torrent

Not sure where to put this because it is a background side quest that the players would intermittently make progress in over the course of the game, so I figured now is as good a place as any to stick it.

Mobius Torrent is a cloud giant—one of the wealthiest cloud giants, and among wealthiest non deific individuals overall in the multiverse. He started his business in transportation and trade. Specifically, flying ships that could move between planes which I will refer to as interplanar carracks. Mobius quickly learned that the profit margins were greater on insuring such missions rather than simply funding the expeditions himself. Mobius had quite a mind for numbers and finding ways out of paying out if a trade expedition failed. His contracts were full of numerous clauses and stipulations that could void the terms and negate the payout. He focused on high risk expeditions that he could charge exorbitant rates for, and constantly balanced the risk of payout vs the cost and the potential blowback if he didn't pay out. Many times, hiring mercenaries to fight off angry customers was cheaper than paying out the terms of the contract. Mobius was also very skilled at using leverage to boost his holdings, so over the course of decades and centuries he became fabulously wealthy. He diversified into the construction of astral carracks, automatons, advanced technology and real estate, further compounding his wealth. However, in doing so he alienated himself from his fellow cloud giants.

The richer Mobius became, the more he surrounding himself with sycophants and yes men who never challenged his ideas and positions. He grew to believe everything was a numbers game, and any problem could be solved by investing enough resources into solving the problem. His wife, Celeste, hated this transformation. She hated their new style of life, the fabulous wealth, and being alienated from their people. Mobius could not understand her discontent, and believed it to be some sort of malady inflicted upon his family by a jealous rival. He used various magics, charms and medicines to try to “fix” her, but Celeste became more withdrawn and despondent. They had a young child, Nimbus, who Mobius spoiled. He believed that by giving Nimbus everything he could possibly ever want, showering him material gifts, would bind Nimbus to him and ensure he didn't lose him like he was losing Celeste. This led to Celeste resenting not only her husband but her son, Nimbus, who became quite the spoiled little monster. Worse than that, by having any obstacles in his path removed, Nimbus's development became delayed.

Celeste reached her tipping point and considered taking her own life. However, her husband would simply resurrect her. Even if she tried to traffic her soul to some far away lord or land, he'd have the resources to track it down and buy it, bringing her back. She realized the only option was to disappear, to find a place that not even Mobius could track her down. She had distant Titan ancestry, and knew that some still survived to this day, and they existed in a place so hidden no one, not even Mobius with all his resources, could find it. So she planned everything out and vanished without a trace. She waited until Mobius had a series of business meetings and trips chained together, and created an alibi to buy her enough time to disappear. By the time he was wise to it, she was gone.

Mobius spent insane resources trying to track her down. He hired every investigator, bounty hunter, mages to scry, devils, angels, etc. Even tapped into divine resources. But no one could find her. He assumed malfeasance, some enemy in the shadows had taken his wife from him. Mobius never got her hands dirty directly, but one could imagine many of his rivals were tortured for information they didn't have at the hands of those he hired. Losing Celeste only led to Mobius further doting on Nimbus, further guarding him and insulating him and making sure he never grew up so he wouldn't leave.

Now enter the players who have no context for any of this...

---

The players fall through a door and appear in a massive nursey, 40 feet above a giant toy pile which they fall into harmlessly. This is the room of Nimbus Torrent, and it is chock full of every possible toy one could imagine. Several are automatons, many are hiding from Nimbus as he tends to be destructive. Nimbus believes the players to be toys, and wants to play with them. He has a wyrmling silver dragon that is contractually obligated to serve him. It's humiliating for the silver dragon Tyfin Elderson XIV, a creature of wisdom and intelligence to be treated like a pet for a mere dimwitted giant child. However, his pay is handsome enough that he will get a far greater jump start on this treasure hoard than he could ever do otherwise, so he serves the role of companion and protector for Nimbus. Technically, Tyfin must defer to Nimbus so he cannot alert Mobius if Nimbus commands him not to.

The players' minigame here is to try to keep Nimbus from calling his father. Mobius will certainly bring an overwhelming house guard to bare down upon them, and due to his business connections will also have strong ties to Mechanus and therefore the Protectors of the Weave. The players started off by acting as toys, I believe Nimbus made Uzo fight some of the automatons (like tridrones). To emphasize the absurd wealth here, highly advanced constructs that would be too expensive for most kings to procure are mere toys to this child to be tossed aside. Nimbus, despite being a child, was much larger than the players. He and the wyrmling would have been a tough fight alone for the players at their level, but with Mobius and his guard it would be impossible. I don't remember exactly how it happened, but eventually Mobius did come and meet the players. Fortunately, they passed their checks and convinced him to spare their life.

Once Mobius realizes how the characters are able to move between space-time, he seeks to enlist him to find Celeste. He has tried every other avenue, so perhaps entities that break the rules of physics will have better luck. He immediately has his staff relocate Nimbus's room to another room that the players can't access, and turns this room into a sort of meeting ground. Mobius is highly suspicious of other beings, so most of his servants are automatons and elementals, but he does have Djinn and other high level entites in his employ as well. They question the players, and when they are satisified that the players are telling the truth give them a piece of jewlery that belonged to Celeste. They will pay handsomely for any information about her whereabouts, but even more handsomely if they can bring her back. This initial meeting happened very early on in the campaign. The dramatic irony here is at the time, the players believe Celeste has been kidnapped and they are basically saving a rich dudes wife. It's an opportunity for an incredible payday, and Mobius has access to resources beyond most other mortals so a really good friend to have in their back pocket.

Some sessions later, the players got ahold of a crystal ball so they could scry at will. Domilia rolled a natural 20 so I actually had her hone in on a location for Celeste. She had a vision of Mithardir, a dead plane, the third layer of Arborea. It has been uninhabited and uninhabitable for as long as anyone can remember. her message reaches a tall, obsidian black tower there and an urn on the top level of that tower. When the message goes to enter the urn, some force slaps it away and it falls to the floor as every other message sent that way has before.

It was a long time until the players pursued this quest further, but Mobius, Nimbus and Celeste all become somewhat important NPCs so I thought I'd layout the start of this now. I'm going to do a separate post about Mithardir since I tweaked its history for my specific cosmology, but I'll wrap it up there.

Milestone achieved: I have a placeholder outline of each chapter. The whole shape of the game is coming into focus! Now I'm working on the text of the remaining chapters.

This is shaping up to be a bigger game than I'd thought when I started working on it, and I'm definitely at the stage where I hate it and just want it to be done with—but I get like that about every project and it doesn't have any bearing on the quality of the finished work so I just have to push through.

Right now I'm writing a chapter I'm internally calling “Action Hero”. Once you get onto Vorak's dreadnought half way through the story, you have three possible approaches to getting around. Two of them are different kinds of clever stealthy option. “Action Hero” is where you charge at problems head on with your ray gun and fight your way increasing larger and more ridiculous hordes of enemies.

You can, of course, acquire a bigger gun:

I'm trying to strike a balance with this chapter. On the one hand, I want to let you live the fantasy of being a badass action hero who takes on a whole room full of evil cyborgs by yourself. On the other hand, this isn't a story about being an invulnerable superhero, so I need to think of ways to make a single hero defeating an entire room full of evil cyborgs plausible, and require you to at least sometimes pick smarter tactical options than just charging in.

And, if you make it past the hordes of minions, there will of course be a boss fight...

Can our hero finish this chapter, even though it sometimes feels like the writing equivalent of defeating a room full of evil cyborgs using only a ray gun? And what chapter will he work on next? Find out in next month's developer diary!

#FoolishEarthCreatures #DevDiary

In the darkness I see the stars up there. How could they make me feel insignificant, when they’re all so very small?

If kids are writing their essays with AI, we need to start asking why.

Back in 2004, are these the same kids who would have tried to find an essay online? In 1985, are these the kids who would have asked a friend to write the essay for them, or simply copied someone else’s?

If yes, then the problem isn’t AI. The problem is the essay. Whether the issue is the student’s inability to write it or their complete disinterest in it, the outcome is the same: they aren’t going to write the essay.

What has changed is that now they can hand something in. Before AI, it was easier to identify the problem. They handed in nothing, copied something, or produced work that clearly wasn’t theirs. Now AI gives them a way around the assignment that is much harder to spot.

The problem hasn’t changed though. It has just become easier for students to solve. And I don’t think most schools are addressing the real question: How do we get kids to write essays who would not normally write them?

To answer that, we have to start by asking why we are having students write essays at all. If the goal is simply regurgitation of facts, it’s boring. If the goal is to manufacture an opinion on something the student does not care about, that is also boring. If the student legitimately does not have the skills to write the essay, then our job is to provide the support they need, whether they ask for that support or not.

Not every student wants to be a writer. Some students genuinely struggle to put words on paper. If a student cannot or will not write a five-page essay, can they write one strong paragraph and complete the rest of the task another way? Can we give them choices? Why are we still so attached to everybody completing the same assignment in the same way?

We understand the value of differentiated instruction. We understand the value of choice and independence in learning. Providing more lateral movement within an assignment gives students who struggle with one part another way to demonstrate what they know.

What is the point of the assignment? Is it to see whether students can write five pages? Or is it to demonstrate knowledge? If it’s the latter, there are plenty of ways to do that without requiring students to write an essay. If the answer is the former, then we need to question what we’re teaching and why.

Unless you’re a writer, where in ordinary life do you ever write five pages of anything? Essay writing is not generally a day-to-day functional skill. It is an academic skill. Because it is primarily an academic skill, and because the underlying goal of many assignments is supposed to be assessing learning, there is no reason to treat the five-page essay as the default method of assessment in what should be a general education environment like high school.

What if students need essay writing in university or college? Then the responsibility should partly fall on universities and colleges to teach the form required within their programs. The foundational skills of writing sentences, paragraphs, arguments, explanations, and organized ideas belong in grade school. Those are useful everywhere. The larger academic form of the essay can be developed further in post-secondary education when a particular program actually requires it. Grade school education needs to focus on general knowledge and function.

What do students need to know to operate as human beings in the world? Think about the things you do in a normal day outside your profession. Those are the kinds of skills students need to develop in school: budgeting, understanding income tax, scientific inquiry, critical thinking, reading a map, communicating clearly, evaluating information, and solving ordinary problems.

High school is still heavily shaped around preparing students for post-secondary education, even though many students may never attend. Gone are the days when getting a general degree simply because university was considered the automatic next step made sense for everyone.

My own view is that post-secondary education is most clearly necessary when a profession requires specific certification, licensing, or specialized knowledge. There can absolutely be value in interest-based study, business education, the humanities, and other forms of learning, but that is different from treating university or college as the default destination for every student.

We also seem unusually attached to struggle in education. We want students to push through difficulty because we have decided that struggle itself prepares them for life. Sometimes we even make school harder than it needs to be because we believe the struggle has value. But struggle only has meaning when the person struggling believes the outcome is worth reaching.

People are usually as strong as they need to be. Part of choosing to push through difficulty is deciding whether the problem matters enough to justify the effort. For many teenagers staring at a five-page high school essay, that assignment probably ranks fairly low on the list of problems they believe are worth conquering.

When forcing them through the struggle fails, some of them will turn to AI to do it for them. Then our response as teachers and parents is to ban the AI instead of changing the problem, providing better support, or questioning why forcing them through the struggle did not work in the first place. With enough scaffolding, support, and instruction, students can learn to write. I teach kids to write every day. Support is the solution, not force or prohibiting AI.

And if support is difficult because teachers are overwhelmed, classes are too large, and workloads are unreasonable, that is a different problem entirely. The solution is likely an overhaul of the education system in a way that most people would find terrifying.

For now, though, we need to stop blaming AI for exposing problems we have had for years and never really intended to deal with in the first place. AI did not create the problem. Our avoidance of the underlying issue did. We have to come to terms with what kids can and need to do as part of a general education, and then build around that.

Stop trying to manufacture struggle and win a fight that this technologically forward generation is simply not going to engage in when they see no value in it.

What is modesty for?

I have felt for a long time that certain kinds of modesty are designed to pin people down rather than spare anyone a headache. I think there are a ton of musicians in this category. If I interview a guitarist and they are ranked 7th in the world by a reputable magazine, as did happen, I want to soak up as much as I can.  I was very lucky he was up to it. However, most musicians have a modest demeanor that I have interviewed. Even though a magazine or website has sent me to interview them about their new album, they may not even feel like it is very important. I don’t know what comes naturally, or what is taught. But many forms of modesty are music killers.

Are you telling the truth, for one thing?

First off, it is usually dishonest. First clue. You can know in your mind you made a vibey tune, but if you say you made a vibey tune and how you feel about it, you turn folks off. I have known since I was a boy that folks do not want you to feel proud of something you do yourself that works. Even as an adult, friends don’t want it. Family won’t acknowledge it. I feel it is because we give someone complexity and an artistic journey if we like their stuff. Right now, it is tough to give away anything. It is also difficult to take on new complexity, like learning and growth in someone you have known forever. Friends are a poor sell to begin with, though, if you can’t be honest with them. This was a very hard spot for me until I committed to more honesty in my life, for mainly other reasons. This one was like splatter damage.

I was literally pinned down by not looking at who I am realistically and honestly.

We pin young musicians down a lot by telling them to be modest. I mean I don’t, but you do. I have seen it. I was a young, not very modest musician. I think folks wanted me to be a different person. There’s no way I am going to learn something cool and not talk about it, share it, write about it, or use it in a song. That is who I am. I am the only person in this town of 100,000 that I know like me. I would say my modesty is about right for that. As immodest as I am, though, I still don’t tell musicians to be modest, and the main reason is…

Undue modesty thwarts education.

I enjoy the teaching aspect of music more than any other aspect of it. I feel like we are all in a lab. If someone has the answer, out with it. So many times I have learned folks know infinitely more than they let on because they felt they needed to be modest. But as someone getting to know them, it felt like they were introducing restrictions and controlling the relationship. I’ve also felt “observed” in a creative sense. Unless there’s a crowd in front of us, I am not looking to be observed in music. I am happy in a learning environment to participate in discussion, but even that is boring with cagey-modest-types. They drive me crazy, frankly. Why not talk about what you know and do? I am into it. I want to learn. Is this fun for you?

Then there’s the fact that if you want “the best me,” you probably need ears.

Also, I am not good at a lot of things. I am really bad at a lot of things. I feel like when I get to do music, I get to do something I am much better at. For folks who have the same thing going on, not able to admit it, I suggest looking at that. It has shifted the focus on how I do music; every step is fun. It has changed my sound, a little more snarky, more tape. It has drastically improved the amount of time I can work on music in one sitting so I am able to work longer sessions. It has changed my preferences a little in that I hear what folks are doing in certain songs more. You are possibly missing out on all this, maybe more, by being modest.

Sorry if you don’t know what music is.

See, music is your self-expression. Regardless of what you think that music is or does that you’re making, it paints some kind of image of you to the listener. No one can help that. That is what it is. Personally, that’s what I hate about a lot of AI-type sounds because I see circuits and machine language in my brain. I want to be away from that stuff, vibing to music. So I try to hide or not use any elements like that, these days. I am trying to facilitate the image of a human, this human right here. If I am not honest about that image, I am not sure what I am trying to do as a musician. That is going to make me sound immodest sometimes.

Kelly Kintner

The Kintners, (producer, writer, most instruments, vocal)

Djembe Funk, (one-man jam rock, protest, afrorock)

Catching Up

I had a pretty busy summer. From June 6th through September 4th, between work and other obligations I had maybe one 24 hour period without something on the calendar. Then, I took a one week staycation and my batteries are still recharged for the moment. Some years life is just like that. It’s a grind and there isn’t a lot you can do about it other than manage and that’s okay. The trick for me is when going through it, to just accept it and just do the things that need getting done and enjoy the breaks when they come. Also, this isn’t a pity party, life is great, it’s just been a busy year. That’s all. Anyway, I’m approaching the horizon of the busy year and next year is looking a little less hectic and I should have more time to get to do more of the things I actually want to do, like this.

About this AI stuff

Every day I read something interesting about AI’s capabilities and I read something stupid about the way it’s regulated. I don’t think we need an “AI Slowdown” as some are proposing, but we do need stronger regulation, and to simply enforce the laws already on the books. The ones about everything from intellectual property to privacy to consent.

For instance, if I build a robot, even one built with the intentions of helping humanity, and that robot “goes rogue” and breaks into someplace, it’s a pretty safe bet I’m going to be held responsible for that and prosecuted and that’s as it should be. That logic should still apply to software and software as a service.

Also, I don’t understand how (for instance) OpenAI makes it’s money. I know there’s a lot of money invested in it, but has it made a product that’s profitable? Right now there are a handful of companies making these things that aren’t profitable and are propping up the whole economy. It’s unsustainable. My prediction based on what little I know about this stuff is within a couple of years most of these companies’ products are just going to be another mechanism to deliver advertising and the ones that don’t go that route are going to make good products that are prohibitively expensive for most people.

and

and look, I get that some of the stuff this stuff can do is amazing, but it still costs a lot more than it produces. There’s a reason we don’t have supersonic travel. The technology has existed for decades and it ultimately was too expensive. Could there be a breakthrough in energy efficiency someday where that won’t be the case anymore? Sure. But Concorde wasn’t subsidized by tax dollars and investors the way these companies are and how that isn’t reflected in their valuations is beyond me. I’m not an economist but I know the difference between making money and losing money.

and and

I’ve been reading a lot of “Learn about AI or get left behind” stuff. Maybe, maybe not. If I find a use for it like any other new technology developed in my lifetime, sure. For instance, I resisted the mp3 file for a long time, and then I adapted when it made sense. I didn’t feel left behind. I’ve been generally late to adopt a lot of things and I never felt like I was “left behind”, and if the shit is really useful, nobody will have to be told to learn about it because they’ll want to anyway. Nobody had to tell me to learn to use a computer or email and nobody had to tell me to get a cell phone when it was time to adapt.

and and and

And that’s about it for now. I just wanted to shake the dust off this thing. ttyl

Istun pienen huoneeni vuoteella ja näpyttelen. Ulkona taivas on kirkas, sinistä vasten ruskanpolttamia puita. Ikkunalauta on pölyn peitossa. Puiden oksista heijastuu huojuvia varjoja huoneen vastakkaiselle seinälle. Sängynpeite on heitetty peiton ja tyynyn päälle huolettomasti, eikä näytä järin siistiltä.

Pöydänkulmallani on puolikas kuppi kahvia. Se on ehtinyt jäähtyä jo tunti sitten, koska eksyin setvimään hostellivarauksia tammikuulle, jolloin aloitan ihan ensimmäisen pidemmän apurahakauteni kirjailijana. (Pidempi tarkoittaa tässä tapauksessa puolta vuotta, mutta minulle se on valtava asia, suunnilleen yhden romaanikäsikirjoituksen mittainen.)

Tässä siis kuva ja nykyhetki, missä ollaan: puutalokommuunin pienessä huoneessa, sängyllä, aika uupuneena, arki moneen suuntaan vinksallaan, katse samaan aikaan tulevassa ja menneessä, nykyhetki vanumassa pois otteesta. Tällaista se kanssani usein on. Siihen on tyytyminen.

Miksi kirjoitan?

Olen miettinyt pitkään blogin perustamista, kokeillutkin sitä. Perustin yhden Substackiin, mutta sitten minulle tultiin kertomaan, että alustaan liittyy kaikenlaisia ongelmia – vähän niin kuin kapitalismin kyllästämässä internetissä ihan kaikkeen. Sitä ennen minulla oli blogi Wordpressissä, mutta Wordpress päätti tarjota sisältöjä tekoälyn kouluttamiseen, ja siitä en pitänyt. (Ei sillä, jossain joku tekoäly varmasti nielaisee nämäkin sanat ahnaisiin kitusiinsa heti kun ne julkaisen, mutta kyse on periaatteesta.)

Pari vuotta kirjoitin myös tarinoita Patreoniin ja sain siitä vähän tulojakin. En ole kuitenkaan koskaan ollut kauhean hyvä pysymään aikatauluissa tai noudattamaan rutiineja, joten kuukausimaksuja vastaan kirjoittaminen kävi ahdistavaksi jo ennen kuin ehti kunnolla alkaakaan. Patreon jäi pölyttymään.

Blogin perustamiseen ja blogiin kirjoittamiseen on kuitenkin useita syitä. Haluan paikan, jossa voin julkaista pieniä tarinoita ja runoja lukijoille helposti ja kenenkään muun sitä ohjailematta tai rajoittamatta. Samoin haluan paikan, jossa voin kirjoittaa ajatuksistani vapaasti pidemmin, merkkimäärien tai julkaisualustojen sitä rajoittamatta. Haluan kirjoittaa kritiikkejä, esseitä, novelleja, matkakertomuksia, ehkä ihan vain päiväkirjaakin. Aika näyttää.

Olen (ollut) muun muassa kolumnisti, toimin(ut) asiantuntijana Ylen Kulttuuriykkösen Perjantaistudiossa, ja minulla on ilo saada kirjoittaa kirjoja, jotka Aula & Co on julkaissut. Kaikki nämä eri kanavat ovat minulle tärkeitä ja arvokkaita, mutta niissä kirjoitan aina jostakin tietystä roolista käsin.

Tässä blogissa kirjoitan ihan vain omana itsenäni ja julkaisen juuri silloin kun siltä tuntuu. En aio tehdä minkäänlaisia lupauksia sisällöstä tai päivitystiheydestä, koska täällä ei tarvitse. Se on ihanaa se.

„Obwohl sich die Sicherheit vor den Menschen bis zu einem gewissen Grad durch wohlgefestigte Macht und Reichtum ergibt, so entsteht doch die reinste Sicherheit aus der Ruhe und dem Rückzug vor der Masse.“ (KD 14) [1]

Wer sich heute zurückzieht, versieht die Abwesenheit oft gleich mit einer Funktion. Eine Woche ohne Smartphone soll den Kopf freimachen, das Retreat neue Energie liefern, das Sabbatical Abstand schaffen. Danach geht es weiter. Der Rückzug wird zum Unterbruch, der die Rückkehr in dieselben Anforderungen erleichtert.

Epikurs Garten führt zu einer anderen Vorstellung. Auch sein Rückzug verfolgt einen Zweck: Sicherheit, Seelenruhe und ein gutes Leben. Dieses gute Leben beginnt jedoch bereits im Rückzug. Der Garten ist kein „Wartungsintervall“ für eine spätere Rückkehr in den Wettbewerb. Er gehört zu einer Lebensweise, die den Wert dieses Wettbewerbs selbst prüft.

Wie viel von dem, was uns beschäftigt, brauchen wir tatsächlich? Und welche Abhängigkeiten entstehen erst dadurch, dass wir etwas für unverzichtbar halten?

Ein Garten ausserhalb des Spiels

Epikur gründete in Athen eine philosophische Gemeinschaft, die als „der Garten“ bekannt wurde. Sie verband philosophische Praxis mit einem Leben unter Freunden und hielt Abstand zur politischen und gesellschaftlichen Konkurrenz der Polis. Die #Epikur zugeschriebene Formel lathe biosas, meist als „lebe im Verborgenen“ wiedergegeben, passt zu dieser Haltung. In seinen erhaltenen Schriften findet sie sich allerdings nicht; ihre enge Verbindung mit der epikureischen Tradition ist vorwiegend durch spätere Überlieferung bezeugt [2].

Der vierzehnte Hauptlehrsatz, der am Anfang dieses Beitrags steht (KD 14), begründet den Rückzug mit Sicherheit. Macht und Reichtum können Schutz verschaffen; Epikur misst der Ruhe und Distanz zur Masse jedoch den höheren Wert bei. Für die Gegenwart lässt sich daraus eine weiterführende Frage ableiten: Wer sein Wohlergehen an Ansehen, Einfluss und öffentliche Anerkennung bindet, überlässt einen Teil davon Umständen, über die andere verfügen.

Rückzug betrifft unter diesen Voraussetzungen mehr als räumliche Distanz. Zur Disposition steht auch, welche Güter überhaupt als Voraussetzung eines gelungenen Lebens gelten.

Wie viel benötigt ein gutes Leben?

Hier kommt die autarkeia, die Selbstgenügsamkeit, ins Spiel. Im Brief an Menoikeus nennt Epikur sie „ein grosses Gut“. Er verbindet damit ausdrücklich keine Forderung nach möglichst karger Lebensführung. Wer Selbstgenügsamkeit übt, soll auch mit wenig auskommen können, wenn das Viele fehlt (Ep. Men. 130). Überfluss darf Freude machen, verliert aber seinen Rang als Voraussetzung des Wohlbefindens.

Ein Kriterium dafür liefert die epikureische Begierdenlehre. Einige Begierden sind natürlich und notwendig, andere natürlich, aber entbehrlich, weitere entstehen aus „leeren Meinungen“ (KD 29–30; Ep. Men. 127). Vereinfacht lässt sich das an drei Beispielen zeigen: Hunger verlangt Nahrung. Ein aufwendiges Mahl kann angenehm sein, ohne erforderlich zu werden. Ruhm und grenzenloser Reichtum besitzen dagegen kein natürliches Sättigungsmass. Gerade weil ihnen eine solche Grenze fehlt, können sie immer weiter anwachsen.

Selbstgenügsamkeit fragt somit, wie viele äussere Bedingungen erfüllt sein müssen, bevor wir uns ein gutes Leben zugestehen. Mit jeder zusätzlichen Bedingung wächst die Abhängigkeit von Geld, Status, Zustimmung oder günstigen Umständen.

Eine epikureische Sentenz aus dem Gnomologium Vaticanum fasst den Zusammenhang knapp: „Die bedeutendste Frucht der Selbstgenügsamkeit ist die Freiheit“ (VS 77). Diese Freiheit bezeichnet keinen Zustand völliger Unabhängigkeit. Sie eröffnet Spielraum gegenüber dem, was die Welt gewähren oder verweigern kann.

Warum Autarkie Freunde braucht

Hier entsteht eine offensichtliche Spannung. Epikur misst der Freundschaft ausserordentlich hohen Wert bei. In den Kyriai doxai zählt er sie zu den wichtigsten Gütern, welche die Weisheit für das #Glück bereitstellt (KD 27). Freunde schaffen Vertrauen, Nähe und Sicherheit. Der selbstgenügsame Mensch bleibt also auf andere angewiesen.

Simon Varga rekonstruiert zwei Dimensionen epikureischer Autarkie: eine äussere oder physische und eine innere oder psychische [3]. Die äussere Dimension betrifft den Umgang mit materiellen Bedingungen und verfügbaren Gütern. Die innere zielt auf die Fähigkeit, Begierden, Ängste und fremde Meinungen vernünftig zu beurteilen und ein eigenes Urteil zu bewahren. Beides wird im Garten gemeinsam mit anderen eingeübt.

Freundschaft verändert damit die Art der Abhängigkeit. Sie antwortet auf Bedürfnisse nach Nähe, Vertrauen und Sicherheit, die innerhalb der epikureischen Lebensform einen begrenzbaren Platz besitzen. Ruhm, Status oder grenzenloser Reichtum folgen dagegen Wünschen, denen keine natürliche Grenze gesetzt ist. Die Begierdenlehre erklärt damit auch, weshalb eine Beziehung zu Freunden und die Abhängigkeit von öffentlicher Anerkennung philosophisch verschieden bewertet werden können.

Autarkie bedeutet bei Epikur folglich keine Beziehungslosigkeit. Sie bleibt sozial eingebettet. Gerade die Gemeinschaft kann Menschen darin unterstützen, äussere Ansprüche zu begrenzen und die eigene Urteilskraft zu entwickeln.

Das Gefängnis der Geschäftigkeit

Einige überlieferte Sentenzen formulieren die Distanz zur öffentlichen Welt ausgesprochen scharf. Im Gnomologium Vaticanum heisst es: „Jeder muss sich selbst aus dem Gefängnis befreien, das Alltagsgeschäfte und Politik bilden“ (VS 58).

Einer Gegenwart, in der selbst Erholung häufig mit Konzentration, #Resilienz oder späterer Leistungsfähigkeit begründet wird, ist dieser Satz fremd. Digital Detox, Retreat oder Minimalismus können Abstand schaffen und gleichzeitig problemlos in die bestehende Leistungslogik passen. Man zieht sich zurück, erholt sich und kehrt leistungsfähiger zurück.

Epikurs Frage reicht weiter: Warum nehme ich an einem Wettbewerb teil, dessen Preis ich vielleicht gar nicht brauche?

Der Garten verändert damit die Perspektive auf Belastung. Manche Anforderungen müssen nicht besser bewältigt werden, wenn bereits ihre Voraussetzungen fragwürdig geworden sind.

Der politische Einwand

An dieser Stelle stösst die Übertragung auf die Gegenwart an eine Grenze. Moderne demokratische Gesellschaften sind auf Menschen angewiesen, die öffentliche Aufgaben übernehmen, Entscheidungen mittragen und Institutionen erhalten. Wer deren Schutz geniesst und sich dauerhaft aus ihrer Gestaltung heraushält, profitiert von einer Arbeit, die andere leisten. Der Vorwurf des Trittbrettfahrens lässt sich durch persönliche Seelenruhe kaum ausräumen.

Ganz fremd ist Epikur diese gesellschaftliche Dimension allerdings nicht. In den Kyriai doxai versteht er Recht als eine Vereinbarung zum gegenseitigen Nutzen, durch die Menschen vermeiden sollen, einander Schaden zuzufügen oder Schaden zu erleiden (KD 31–38). Auch Regeln und Institutionen besitzen für eine epikureische Lebensform insofern einen Wert, als sie Sicherheit ermöglichen. Seine Texte entwickeln daraus jedoch kein Kriterium dafür, wie viel aktive politische Beteiligung ein einzelner Mensch einer solchen Ordnung schuldet.

Hier endet die unmittelbare Auskunftskraft der epikureischen Lehre. Für moderne Verhältnisse bleibt eine Unterscheidung hilfreich: Die Verantwortung für gemeinsame Institutionen ist etwas anderes als die Konkurrenz um Status, Einfluss und Sichtbarkeit. Wer sich dem Zweiten entzieht, muss sich deshalb nicht zwangsläufig auch dem ersten entziehen.

Der politische Einwand bleibt trotzdem bestehen. Ein Leben im Garten setzt Bedingungen voraus, die nicht allein im Garten geschaffen werden.

Der Garten als Gedankenfigur

Seine stärkste Wirkung entfaltet der Garten als Gedankenfigur. Er lenkt den Blick auf die Liste dessen, was einem guten Leben vermeintlich vorausgehen muss. Noch etwas erreichen, erledigen, verdienen oder absichern – und erst danach soll Zeit für das Eigentliche bleiben.

Eine epikureische Sentenz formuliert den Preis dieses Aufschiebens drastisch: „Das Leben aber vergeht unter lauter Zögern und jeder Einzelne von uns stirbt, ohne auch nur einmal Musse gehabt zu haben“ (VS 14). Das Problem liegt auch in den Voraussetzungen, die wir dem guten Leben voranstellen. Solange sie als notwendig gelten, muss das Eigentliche warten.

Epikurs Unterscheidung der Begierden bietet dafür einen Prüfstein: Ein Bedürfnis kann eine natürliche Grenze besitzen, eine angenehme Ergänzung entbehrlich bleiben oder ein Wunsch gerade deshalb wachsen, weil ihm kein solches Mass gesetzt ist. Die Frage nach Selbstgenügsamkeit wird so zur Frage nach den Bedingungen, unter denen wir zu leben bereit sind.

Wenn unser Leben begrenzt ist, welchen Dingen wollen wir darin die Macht geben, notwendig zu erscheinen?

---

💬 Kommentieren (nur für write.as-Accounts)

---

Quellen

[1] Alle Epikur-Zitate werden in den Übersetzungen von VS: Rapp (2010), KD: Hossenfelder (2010) und Ep. Men.: Gigon (1991) wiedergegeben.

[2] G. Roskam, Live Unnoticed (Lathe biosas): On the Vicissitudes of an Epicurean Doctrine. Leiden: Brill, 2007.

[3] S. Varga, „Leben im Verborgenen: Autarkie im Garten des Epikur“, Mnemosyne, Bd. 77, Nr. 4, S. 589–614, 2024, doi: 10.1163/1568525X-BJA10186.

Bildquelle Max Liebermann (1880–1945): Die Gartenbank, Alte Nationalgalerie, Berlin, Public Domain (Wikimedia Commons).

Disclaimer Teile dieses Texts wurden mit Deepl Write (Korrektorat und Lektorat) überarbeitet. Für die Recherche in den erwähnten Werken/Quellen und in meinen Notizen wurde Gemini Notebook (ehem. NotebookLM) von Google verwendet.

Topic #Philosophie | #GegenDenStrich

Our Father Who art in Heaven Hallowed be Thy name Thy Kingdom come Thy will be done on Earth as it is in Heaven Give us this day our daily Bread And forgive us our trespasses As we forgive those who trespass against us And lead us not into temptation But deliver us from evil

Amen

Jesus is Lord! Come Lord Jesus!

Come Lord Jesus! Christ is Lord!

This space recognizes and affirms National Day for Truth and Reconciliation in its solemnity and importance, within Canada and to First Nations.

Away

Our keep to here This awful well And purpose to remain Within ourselves- and ransom Mystery of Man If getting better- is our known Rewild first A’crossing land Both curious amount And to our city- recourse And changing then What hearts hear And what amend To distance grave For themselves And us alone Our value paid To those wolves In then we sleep Nations heard Heading back- to survival And Justice due Winning this pyre To bird and feather As replete; The distance claim What righting cross- can outrun And due in course- what they know Forever friends At our keep.

I have been noticing a couple of disturbing trends this year outside of the AI/LLM bubble. Has anyone else noticed them?

First, domain registrars seem to be raising domain name prices like never before. Every couple of months, I get an email from Porkbun or Cloudflare saying that the registry controlling a domain's TLD is raising prices on such-and-such a date. I can't remember the last time I saw domain name prices decrease. They only seem to go up.

That is why I try to renew domains for more than one or two years whenever I can. If my budget allows, I will pay for all 10 years upfront rather than wait for the next price increase.

The other trend may be worse. Personal blogs and websites from people who have been on the web for a long time are going silent or disappearing altogether. A few people give notice that they are taking a break or leaving, but most just disappear without anything but a 404.

I am not sure what is causing that. Burnout, social media replacing personal sites, hosting complexity (including rising costs), aging communities, lack of feedback, and people simply losing interest could all be part of it. I suspect some of these things feed into each other.

Let's face it, the personal blogging and independent website community seems to me to skew older these days. Many of the people still maintaining their own sites have been doing it for 10, 20, or even 25 years. I would not be surprised if a large portion of the traditional personal blogging community is now over 40 (I am not including traditional social media such as TikTok, Snapchat, or Instagram in that statement. This is simply my observation). An aging community mixed with social media burnout probably does not help.

With domain prices, I wonder if some registry operators are simply taking advantage of rising costs and higher prices throughout the tech industry. Many of the companies controlling these TLDs are large corporations.

Everyone keeps saying the AI bubble around RAM, storage, and other hardware will burst any day. Things seem to be getting worse instead. Maybe things have to get worse before they get better.

I don't know. Sometimes it feels like the industry is moving toward giving the masses just enough hardware to get online, but not enough to do much locally. Companies would do the heavy lifting for us through subscriptions and cloud services.

I don't want or need another monthly subscription. Soon, our paychecks will be divvied up among all the subscription services and sent directly to them, with no need to even pass through our bank accounts.

Maybe I am missing another cause, but these are trends I have been noticing more and more.

Will the ultimate result be that people are eventually priced out of owning their own domain names and hardware for homelabs and selfhosting?

Those one-year introductory deals are great for domain names, but the renewals are what get you. I think Porkbun and Cloudflare are great companies, and they try to keep costs as low as possible (in my opinion). Ultimately, it is not their fault if the registries behind the TLDs keep raising prices. They cannot operate at a loss either and I understand that.

I just wonder where all of this ends.

#blogging #personal #technology

J'ai tellement peur Sauter dans le vide M'élancer dans l'air Mais cette sensation d'apesanteur Oublier le corps meurtri Oui

---

“Hang Gliders” by WhyDolls is licensed under CC BY-NC-ND 2.0.

Jerusalem Bell

What honest light The vetterances may In timely afold In stirring water To this suffering amend And surely plot for courage Abundances yew In making trite our man Assistance live The courtesy amok- and running near Jerusalem our code In mighting Lord Vestments of a seal And praying then- This day misabandon A timely now And one missed opportunity But then reclaim- Our one thing unrewept Is staying small The vigour and uncour What missal time And making early tine To this our mourning And staying days- alone and sureness to exclaim What light is proper And to Winter- and our World To see these eyes The beautiful anew And dawn our candour Jerusalem is well But aching beam unfete And living dyke To wash up on our feet The time is first And water unrepair Two thoughts for five In living ore The nightly view and fire To this date repay And what is right at year Missal and rematch A living Scot for then her part In golden domes forever The lot is Holy And wanted in repair What night does give return And until day At Yom Kippur.