Hello Anon. There’s a difference between “realism” and “based on neuroscience more current than a FAMOUSLY disproved factoid.”
We’ve updated the terminology and conceptual bases for our AI stories, our cyborg stories, our natural and ecological disaster stories. We’ve made at LEAST cosmetic modifications to the way our pop media engages and expounds upon these ideas.
From Heinlein to Gibson. From Asimov to…later Asimov. From Orwell to Nolan (Jonah, not Christopher; I’m talking Person of Interest, here), we’ve learned from our misconceptions and mistakes.
So why is it that, when we decide to talk about the nature of the brain, we always, ALWAYS fall back on a thing that was disproved a Very.
So, no, not “realistic,” but Extrapolated From Our Most Current Picture Picture Of Reality.
Again, this has been bugging me every time the stupid commercial for it plays.
Told my bro it’s dumb. Sorry Scarlett love ya but nah
What the fuck. What thef. Uck. You come on here, you come into my house, you take a shit on my post you shit on garlic bread, you shit on everything I stand for, on this, the day of my daughter’s wedding… .