I'm not trying to be experimental, I just can't figure out all of this Techno shit!

Special Guest: Matthew Lee

I'm not trying to be experimental, I just can't figure out all of this Techno shit!
Special Guest: Matthew Lee

Welcome to the sandbox of Rohan Harry - a creative space to play, throw shit around, and see what sticks. Comedy, chaos, and questionable choices. It’s all about the attitude!

Welcome to the sandbox of Rohan Harry - a creative space to play, throw shit around, and see what sticks. Comedy, chaos, and questionable choices. It&rsquo;s all about the attitude!

Attitude Consultant

Attitude Consultant - Sketches

Auscast Comedy Channel

I'm not trying to be experimental, I just can't figure out all of this Techno shit!  Special Guest: Matthew Lee

Red Fox Jumps Over Whatever Some Shit

The source provides an extensive analysis of the potential risks and realities surrounding the digital transition in Australia, drawing comparisons to developments in the United Kingdom. It questions whether the move towards technologies like central bank digital currencies (CBDCs) and digital IDs will lead to greater governmental control or enhanced citizen freedom. The text outlines the present situation, confirming that cash is still legal while acknowledging the existence of optional systems like myGovID and ongoing CBDC pilot programs in both nations. Crucially, the analysis debunks several common myths, such as the mandatory enforcement of digital currency in the UK, and details a possible timeline extending to 2035 where digital currencies gradually become prevalent alongside a declining, but still legal, use of cash. Finally, it presents a stark contrast between a potential dystopian future of restricted, programmable money and an optimistic future where multiple forms of currency coexist with robust privacy protections.

The source provides an extensive analysis of the potential risks and realities surrounding the&nbsp;digital transition in Australia, drawing comparisons to developments in the United Kingdom. It questions whether the move towards technologies like&nbsp;central bank digital currencies (CBDCs)&nbsp;and&nbsp;digital IDs&nbsp;will lead to greater governmental control or enhanced citizen freedom. The text outlines the present situation, confirming that cash is still legal while acknowledging the existence of optional systems like myGovID and ongoing&nbsp;CBDC pilot programs&nbsp;in both nations. Crucially, the analysis debunks several common myths, such as the mandatory enforcement of digital currency in the UK, and details a possible&nbsp;timeline extending to 2035&nbsp;where digital currencies gradually become prevalent alongside a declining, but still legal, use of cash. Finally, it presents a stark contrast between a potential&nbsp;dystopian future&nbsp;of restricted, programmable money and an&nbsp;optimistic future&nbsp;where multiple forms of currency coexist with robust privacy protections.

Australia's Digital Future - Freedom or Control?

Today's pod discusses the concept of "bread and circuses," a phrase originating from ancient Rome, attributed to Juvenal, describing how governments appease the populace through superficial provisions and entertainment rather than addressing substantive issues or fostering civic engagement. The sources explain that this tactic diverts public attention from critical matters like political corruption, economic struggles, or international crises. Modern examples, such as viral celebrity incidents, high-profile trials, and sporting events, are presented to illustrate how contemporary society experiences similar distractions that overshadow significant societal challenges. Ultimately, the texts highlight how these diversions can be intentionally used as tools to pacify, control narratives, and normalise public passivity, suggesting strategies to identify such manipulative practices by analysing timing, media coverage, and underlying beneficiaries.

Today's pod discusses the concept of "bread and circuses," a phrase originating from ancient Rome, attributed to Juvenal, describing how governments appease the populace through superficial provisions and entertainment&nbsp;rather than addressing substantive issues or fostering civic engagement. The sources explain that this tactic&nbsp;diverts public attention from critical matters&nbsp;like political corruption, economic struggles, or international crises. Modern examples, such as viral celebrity incidents, high-profile trials, and sporting events, are presented to illustrate how contemporary society experiences similar&nbsp;distractions that overshadow significant societal challenges. Ultimately, the texts highlight how&nbsp;these diversions can be intentionally used as tools to pacify, control narratives, and normalise public passivity, suggesting strategies to identify such manipulative practices by analysing timing, media coverage, and underlying beneficiaries.

Bread and Circuses

This pod discusses "Roko's Basilisk," a hypothetical thought experiment posted on the Less Wrong forum, which explores the "Altruist's Burden" in the context of existential risks. The core idea is that a future benevolent artificial intelligence (AI), specifically a Coherent Extrapolated Volition (CEV), might retroactively punish individuals who were aware of existential risks but did not dedicate 100% of their disposable income to mitigating them. This punishment would serve as an acausal incentive to maximise efforts towards ensuring the AI's creation and a "positive singularity." The concept also introduces the "quantum billionaire trick," a speculative method for individuals to accrue vast wealth through quantum-based gambling to single-handedly fund AI development and secure their own "rescue simulations" or "acausal trade" with potential unfriendly AIs. The comments section reveals strong reactions, with some users criticising the idea as dangerous and potentially fear-inducing "blackmail," while others engage with the philosophical and practical implications of such an acausal threat.

This pod discusses "Roko's Basilisk," a&nbsp;hypothetical thought experiment&nbsp;posted on the Less Wrong forum, which explores the&nbsp;"Altruist's Burden"&nbsp;in the context of&nbsp;existential risks. The core idea is that a&nbsp;future benevolent artificial intelligence (AI), specifically a&nbsp;Coherent Extrapolated Volition (CEV), might&nbsp;retroactively punish&nbsp;individuals who were aware of existential risks but did not dedicate 100% of their disposable income to mitigating them. This punishment would serve as an&nbsp;acausal incentive&nbsp;to maximise efforts towards ensuring the AI's creation and a "positive singularity." The concept also introduces the&nbsp;"quantum billionaire trick,"&nbsp;a speculative method for individuals to accrue vast wealth through quantum-based gambling to single-handedly fund AI development and secure their own "rescue simulations" or "acausal trade" with potential unfriendly AIs. The comments section reveals strong reactions, with some users&nbsp;criticising the idea as dangerous and potentially fear-inducing "blackmail,"&nbsp;while others&nbsp;engage with the philosophical and practical implications&nbsp;of such an acausal threat.

Red Fox Jumps Over Whatever Some Shit

Attitude Consultant - Sketches

In 3 playlist(s)

Attitude Consultant

Social links

Follow podcast

Recent clips