<instructions>Your goal is to analyze the following comment and estimate how highly it will be upvoted by the Hacker News community.</instructions><comment><author>dmreedy</author><text>Riffing on this, I think an interesting and fundamental phenomenon of societies is exactly their frequent inability to imagine their successors, or even the possibility of a successor. Each seeing themselves as a logical peak of the progressive arrow history, especially post-enlightenment (cf. Fukuyama&amp;#x27;s (in)famous &lt;i&gt;The End of History&lt;/i&gt;[0]).&lt;p&gt;It seems to boil down to the sort of societal consensus definition of &amp;quot;us&amp;quot; that serves as a foundation for the individual definitions of &amp;quot;me&amp;quot; that comprise a society. It&amp;#x27;s why societies seem to tend to see their peers and predecessors as lesser as well; they are all their own &amp;quot;us&amp;quot;es, in some ways inaccessible to our &amp;quot;us&amp;quot;. They may say the same words, but mean different things. They have the same human equipment for reasoning and synthesis, but a different set of priors from which this calculus manipulates and concludes. They seem dumb because they don&amp;#x27;t come to the same obvious conclusions we do.&lt;p&gt;And it seems to motivate conservative behavior, by way of fear. At least we can grapple and argue with our contemporaries, and scorn our predecessors. We know what they think, or at least we think we know what they think, filtered through the lens of what we think. But as a societal consensus starts to shift, and we start seeing new priors appearing, things start to get uncomfortable. We see a glimpse of a future we don&amp;#x27;t understand; we used to be with &amp;quot;it&amp;quot; but &amp;quot;it&amp;quot; changed[1]. We don&amp;#x27;t know anymore what the next ones &lt;i&gt;will&lt;/i&gt; think. What they will be like.&lt;p&gt;They will still be humans, but they will be a different &lt;i&gt;us&lt;/i&gt;, completely inaccessible to our &lt;i&gt;us&lt;/i&gt;.&lt;p&gt;---&lt;p&gt;[0] I know his philosophy is more a bit more nuanced, but it&amp;#x27;s such a perfect and unfortunate phrasing, accepted so implicitly and literally.&lt;p&gt;[1] To quote Grampa Simpson</text><parent_chain></parent_chain></comment><story><title>The Bronze Age has never looked stronger</title><url>https://www.thechatner.com/p/its-1178-bce-and-the-bronze-age-has</url></story>
<instructions>Your goal is to analyze the following comment and estimate how highly it will be upvoted by the Hacker News community.</instructions><comment><author>namaria</author><text>The Bronze age collapse is one of my favorite topics in History. And I see a lot of parallels between the centralized palace economies that produced much brittleness then and the &amp;#x27;everything is controlled by networked digital computers and defined in software&amp;#x27; Ruby Goldberg machine of a civilization we have now.</text><parent_chain></parent_chain></comment><story><title>The Bronze Age has never looked stronger</title><url>https://www.thechatner.com/p/its-1178-bce-and-the-bronze-age-has</url></story>