I view technology as know-how that changes our relationship to the world, rather than as merely tools or human-made artefacts. This perspective is influenced by Heidegger, who claimed that modern technology makes us see everything as resources to be optimized and exploited. I’ve been wondering whether other technologies also change our perspectives, but not in that specific way.
Hesiod’s Theogony (pronounced with a hard “g” as in polygon) describes the origins and genealogies of the Greek gods. [1] By analogy, I’ll use the term technogonies for stories that describe the origins of technology. In traditional myths, technologies come from the gods, who are usually benefactors. In modern stories, tech comes from inside society, although the stories are complicated and sometimes contested.
I cast a wide net with the term “technology,” roughly approximating the Greek technē, (Wikipedia, Liddell & Scott) meaning practical knowledge, arts, and craft.
Myths have many functions (see, e.g., Britannica; GPT-4o-Mini; Joseph Campbell). The most relevant ones here are explanation, especially stories of origins; cultural identity, encapsulating the beliefs and values of a culture; and legitimating the authority of rulers or political systems. Other functions include relating to the mystical, moral lessons, understanding the human experience, describing the status quo, and entertainment.
In a moment I’ll share some myths about the origin of technology, using my current definition that myths are widely known stories that frame how groups of people think about, and act in, the world. Before that, though, a summary of my conclusions.
For convenience I'm going to divide myths into “traditional” and “modern.” I focus on the extreme ends of this spectrum, that is, societies before the Common Era, and after the Industrial Revolution.
In many traditional myths, the originators of technology are deities. They play sometimes overlapping roles that include transmission (Prometheus, the Enochian Watchers, Coyote), the patronage of human craftspeople (Enki, Hephaestus, Ptah), and—rarely—invention (Theuth). In the rare example I found of an ancient hero-king discovering a technology, the Shahnameh relates that the hero-king Hushang, son of Siamak, accidentally discovered fire when he hurled a piece of flint to kill a snake. Missing the serpent, the rock struck another flint to produce fiery sparks.
In most cases, the gods are benefactors. In the Judaic tradition, though, the originators and transmitters are associated with transgression: Caine’s lineage, and the Watchers in 1 Enoch. Some benefactors are more tricksters than criminals, like Prometheus and Coyote. The gods associated with craft, especially metallurgy, are often misshapen, dark, and crippled figures like Hephaistos and the dwarves in the Norse tradition. In most other traditions, they are noble figures, like Theuth and Enki.
In traditional myths, technologies already exist among the gods and are then given to humans. In modern myths, technologies usually arise through invention, and occasionally by discovery, which is associated with science rather than technology. [2]
In traditional mythologies, arts and crafts come into human society from the outside, e.g., through theft or revelation by gods. In the modern versions, they arise from inside society.
While modern myths are ostensibly materialist and empirical, I find them more mysterious than traditional ones. Modern, historical accounts are complicated and often hotly debated; there is no simple answer. In contrast, traditional myths are simple accounts with just a few protagonists, all with human motives.
Magic may be the deep thread that connects traditional and modern. The secret know-how revealed by the Enochian fallen angels includes sorcery and charms as well as horticulture, weaponry, and astronomy (1 Enoch 7:1 and 8). Arthur C Clark’s famous adage about advanced technology and magic applies, and the quip about not fooling everyone all of the time. All new technology is magical to some of the people, and some new technology is magical to all of the people (current example: nobody seems to know why LLMs work as well as they do).
Fire is a foundational technology, and it’s striking that mythologies the world over include stories of stealing it to benefit humanity. As I noted above there are also myths about stealing the heavenly lights, and the divine substance, Soma. Theft is a common human characteristic, and nor surprisingly it features in many myths. I don’t think I can make a case that it’s particularly associated with technology. Take the story of Chang’e (嫦娥) stealing an elixir of immortality from her husband, the legendary archer Hou Yi (后羿), and escaping to become the goddess of the moon (Mythopedia). An elixir of life is potent biotech, but this isn’t really about bringing technology to humanity. The same is true for modern technology. I detail some examples of intellectual property theft and industrial espionage, but they don’t seem to be the standard way of doing business.
The book of Genesis (same etymology as Theogony, [1]) seems ambivalent about technology, at best. There is an appreciation for craftsmanship such of that of the Tabernacle and Temple (Exodus 25-27, 31:1-6), but the Bible also warns against the dangers of idolatry (e.g., Exodus 20:4-5). Cities like Jerusalem can be places of cultural achievement and refuge, but they’re also dens of iniquity like Sodom and Gomorra (Genesis 19)
Arts and crafts are associated with Cain, cursed by God for killing his brother Abel. Cain built a (the first?) city (Genesis 4:17). Lamech, fifth in Cain’s line, had three sons (Genesis 4:18): Jabal, “father of those who live in tents and raise livestock”; Jubal, “father of all who play stringed instruments and pipes”; and Tubal-Cain, who forged metal tools. [3]
Chapters 6–11 of the apocryphal Jewish apocalyptic text 1 Enoch flesh out Genesis 6. [4] It tells of a group of fallen angels (the Watchers, aka egregores from the Greek) who mate with human women and impart to them various forms of forbidden knowledge, including technologies related to warfare, cosmetics, and astrology. (For a summary, see my Enoch’s Egregores as Bringers of Tech. As secrets, see 1 Enoch 64:2 and 68:2.) Their offspring, the Nephilim, devastate the world, and by implication this knowledge contributes to humanity's moral decline.
When Zeus withheld fire from humans as punishment, Prometheus stole it and gave it back (theoi.com). [5] According to Aeschylus, Prometheus was also invented and taught various arts and sciences to humans, including astronomy, writing, animal domestication, shipping, medicine, augury, and metallurgy (Prometheus Bound, [1, 265, 459, 477]). In the Protagoras, Plato relates that Prometheus also made off with the “wisdom in the arts” of Hephaestus and Athena (Plat. Prot. 321c and 321e; Jowett trans. [6])
Hephaestus was the god of fire, though primarily as it manifests as a force of nature in volcanoes (theoi.com). He was a craftsman with a workshop on Olympus. The Odyssey (Book 6, 233; Book 23, 160) notes that Hephaestus and Athena taught metallurgy to craftsmen.
Athena gave the olive tree to Athens, which might symbolize advancement in agriculture (Pseudo-Apollodorus, Bibliotheca 3. 14. 1, quoted in theoi.com). She is also the goddess of weaving, teaching it to Pandora and having a contest with Arachne (Hesiod, Works and Days 60 ff, and Ovid, Metamorphoses, quoted in theoi.com).
In this tradition, technology is seen as beneficial and is associated with several deities.
Thoth (Theuth) is credited by some sources with the invention of writing, cf. Anthologia, quoting Plato, Phaedrus; and Diodorus Siculus, Library of History (calling Thoth “Hermes”).
Ptah was considered the patron deity of craftsmen, especially stone-based crafts and architecture (Britannica, Wikipedia). However, I didn’t see any stories about his role in either creating or transmitting these skills to mortals.
Isis was seen as a powerful magician and healer who taught the women of Egypt how to weave, bake, and brew beer (Britannica). I didn’t find indications that she taught healing skills, though she was frequently invoked on behalf of the sick (ibid.).
Osiris was associated with agriculture and the annual flooding of the Nile River (World History Encyclopedia), and thus presumably stood for sophisticated irrigation techniques like canal systems, the ox-drawn plough, and the shaduf.
Enki, the Sumerian water god of the city of Eridu in the southern wetlands of today’s Iraq, was patron of craftsmen and artisans, as well as the god of wisdom, creator, and protector of humanity (AncientPages). He was a maker-god, known in the Akkadian-Babylonian era as Nudimmud, “He Who Fashions Things.” He’s associated with wisdom, described in Sumerian myths quoted by AncientPages as “he of exceptional knowledge, who knows the divine powers in heaven and earth, who from his own dwelling already knows the intentions of the gods…” He was an advisor to rulers, not a sovereign himself. AncientPages asserts that in the myth “Adapa and the South Wind”, Enki helps humanity keep the gift of magic and incantations. According to the Sumerian epic poem Inanna and Enki, he was the one who dedicated the art of writing to the people of earth. He was also the keeper of the divine powers called Mes, the gifts of civilization. There are over a hundres Mes, ranging from godship and power to various crafts and musical instruments (Wikipedia).
In Inanna and Enki, Inanna (Ishtar) stole the Mes from Enki (Wikipedia). She is associated with sensuality, procreation, divine law, and political power—Aphrodite, Hera and Athena rolled into one.
The substance Soma is said to be a divine drink that was originally consumed only by the Hindu gods to grant them immortality. However, in one famous myth, the mighty eagle-like creature Garuda stole the Soma from the gods (Britannica). However, it was to benefit the nagas, divine serpents, as a deal to release Garuda’s mother from slavery, not to bring it to humanity.
Odin sacrificed himself to gain knowledge of the runes (Norse Mythology blog). I haven’t been able to find evidence that he shared this knowledge with humanity—but they evidently somehow acquired this system of writing and mystic knowledge, by implication from Odin.
The dwarves are often associated with craftsmanship and skill, such as in the creation of the so-called treasures of the gods like Thor’s hammer Mjolnir, the golden ring Draupnir, and the spear Gungnir (Wikipedia).
There are many stories of trickster beings stealing fire, including Rabbit, Spider, Nanbozho, and Crow (Wikipedia). For example, Coyote stole fire from the selfish Fire Beings and brought to the human village with the help of other beings like Squirrel, Chipmunk, Frog, and Wood, he (Unitarian Universalist Association).
Tangentially, there are several Native American stories of tricksters who steal the sun or moon to bring light and order to the world. In the Zuni tradition, Eagle and Coyote steal the Sun and Moon from the Kachinas, a powerful people (Stanford). There is a story among the Pacific Northwest tribes of Raven stealing the Sun, Moon, and Stars from an old man who kept them locked in a cedar chest (Glass Bird Studios; U. Victoria; World Anvil.)
The theft of fire for the benefit of humanity recurs in many world mythologies, see e.g. Wikipedia relating stories from Africa, the Americas, Asia, Europe, and Oceania.
There are many Aboriginal stories about fire and the art of making it. It’s often owned by certain birds or animals that don’t want to share their secret. Others then steal it from them (or extort it, in the case of the Eagle-hawk and Water-rat). Sometimes it’s then made available to people (TOTA, excerpts from Dixon, The Mythology of All Races; Fire & Rescue NSW). There are stories both about fire sticks and striking stones together as fire-makers.
Narratives can emphasize individual agency or systemic force. Narratives focused on inventors and entrepreneurs highlight the “heroic” efforts of individuals like James Watt (steam engine), Richard Arkwright (water frame) or Josiah Wedgwood (pottery) in driving technological and economic change. Systemic explanations, on the other hand, emphasize broader social, economic, and political forces that shape the context in which these individuals operate, and argue that individual ingenuity alone is insufficient to explain the scale and scope of the Industrial Revolution. One can see them as micro vs. macro perspectives: while an individual entrepreneur might introduce a new manufacturing technique, the success of that technique depends on macro-level factors like the availability of labor, access to markets, and the legal framework governing property rights and contracts. (H/t Gemini-1.5-Pro.)
I’ll focus here on systemic narratives. Here are four, courtesy Gemini-1.5-Pro:
The Great Divergence: Factors in Europe like specific institutional arrangements (e.g., property rights, legal systems), cultural values (e.g., the Protestant work ethic), and geographic advantages (e.g., access to coal and navigable rivers) enabled this region to industrialize before other parts of the world like Asia.
Global Trade and Colonialism: Challenging the Eurocentric view of the Great Divergence, this view highlights the importance of global trade and colonialism in shaping the Industrial Revolution. It argues that access to resources and markets in the Americas and other colonized regions provided Europe with crucial capital, raw materials (like cotton), and consumer demand that fueled industrial growth. It emphasizes global interconnectedness and exploitative colonial relationships.
Technological Determinism: This narrative focuses on the transformative power of specific technological innovations. Inventions like the steam engine, the cotton gin, and the power loom fundamentally altered production processes, leading to increased efficiency, lower costs, and mass production. This perspective often downplays the importance of social, economic, and political factors in shaping technological change.
Social and Cultural Change: Factors like changing demographics (e.g., population growth), urbanization, the rise of a consumer culture, and the development of new forms of labor organization (e.g., factories) are seen as crucial preconditions for industrial growth. Broader social and cultural transformations created the conditions for industrialization.
There are various origin stories for the internet. For example, its roots can be traced back to ARPANET, developed in the late 1960s by the Advanced Research Projects Agency (ARPA) of the U.S. DoD. Another origin story involves the concept of packet switching, developed by Paul Baran and Donald Davies in the 1960s. One can also invoke the invention of the World Wide Web by Tim Berners-Lee in 1989.
In the government action narrative, the internet's origin can be largely credited to government initiatives like ARPANET. This government investment fostered innovation in networking and communication protocols. Further, the transition to a public internet in the 1990s was supported by policies that encouraged open access and funding for research.
In the market/entrepreneurship narrative, the success of the internet is attributed to the entrepreneurial spirit and market dynamics that emerged in the 1990s. Private companies began to innovate rapidly, creating web browsers, search engines, and e-commerce platforms. Visionaries like Jeff Bezos (Amazon) and Sergey Brin and Larry Page (Google) capitalized on the burgeoning online marketplace, transforming how people shop and find information.
There’s also an engineering/standards narrative. Key protocols like TCP/IP provided a reliable framework for data transmission. The IETF (Internet Engineering Task Force) was produced technical standards and protocols that ensured the internet remained cohesive and functional. The W3C (World Wide Web Consortium, established by Tim Berners-Lee) focused on web standards and accessibility, promoting seamless use of web pages.
The legal/IPR narrative emphasizes the importance of open protocols, such as TCP/IP, which were developed without the burden of patent royalties. This framework fostered an environment conducive to innovation and widespread adoption. The legal recognition of software patents and copyright in the early days of the internet played a role in shaping its development.
Some more narrative threads:
Social media have long history, at least in internet-time. Six Degrees (1997) allowed users to create profiles and connect with friends. Friendster (2002) was one of the first platforms to gain significant popularity, and MySpace became dominant in the mid-2000s. Facebook launched in 2004, followed by Twitter in 2006. The early 2010’s saw Instagram and Snapchat, with TikTok (2016) rapidly gained popularity thanks to its algorithm-driven content discovery. The narrative was a succession of many, distinct high profile app experiences, rather than a single company or entrepreneur, although underlying dynamics like pervasive broadband connectivity, ad-based monetization, and viral memes powered all of them.
Since these businesses are customer-facing, they are more salient in public awareness than equally powerful businesses-to-business ogregores like pharmacy benefit managers and credit rating agencies.
While it’s a story about the nature, not the origin, of social media, there is a narrative that social media were designed to be addictive in order to drive user engagement and advertising revenue (consensus.app research summary; the social dilemma documentary).
Contemporary innovators are often held up as heroes, from neglected underdogs like Charles Babbage and Katalin Karikó, to celebrities like Elon Musk, creatives like Steve Jobs, tycoons like Jeff Bezos, and nerds like Bill Gates and Mark Zuckerberg.
Some entrepreneurs remind me of the trickster archetype, like Elizabeth Holmes and Sam Bankman-Fried. One can multiply examples, like Adam Neumann (WeWork), Martin Shkreli (“Pharma Bro”), Trevor Milton (Nikola), and Billy McFarland (Fyre Festival).
There are several iconic characters in modern English literature who show the consequences of pursuing forbidden or groundbreaking knowledge, including Faust (Goethe), Frankenstein (Shelley), Dr. Moreau (Wells), Griffin (Wells’ “The Invisible Man”), and Dr. Jekyll (Stevenson).
Here are some examples in the modern era where theft or unauthorized acquisition played a role in technological innovation. I was surprised that there weren’t more. I’m beginning to doubt my intuition that the Trickster is particularly strongly associated with technology.
In the late 18th century, Britain tried to protect its technological advantage in textiles by prohibiting the export of textile machinery designs and the emigration of skilled textile workers. Samuel Slater memorized the details of Richard Arkwright’s patented spinning frames that he oversaw in England, emigrated in 1789, and established the United States’ first water-powered textile mill in Rhode Island and became a rich man. (History.com.)
Apple’s development of the Macintosh was heavily influenced by concepts from Xerox’s PARC, where the graphical user interface was initially developed. Steve Jobs later accused Gates and Microsoft of "ripping off" the Macintosh. Gates famously told Jobs: "Well, Steve, I think there's more than one way of looking at it. I think it's more like we both had this rich neighbor named Xerox and I broke into his house to steal the TV set and found out that you had already stolen it." (The Independent.)
Anthony Levandowski pleaded guilty to stealing trade secrets from Google subsidiary Waymo to create Otto, which Uber later acquired (Data Insider).
Numerous lawsuits (about two dozen, by one count) are currently underway against various AI companies, alleging that they have appropriated copyrighted content without permission (Ropes & Gray; copyright alliance). The U.S. Copyright Office has issued a Notice of Inquiry seeking comments about the collection and curation of AI dataset sources, how those datasets are used, and whether permission by or compensation for copyright owners should be required.
According to Wikipedia, industrial espionage has a long history, including the theft of the manufacturing methods of Chinese porcelain in 1712, state-sponsored theft of British industrial technology by France in the 18th century, and the USSR copying American chip designs in the 1980s. It makes a difference: According to a 2020 American Economic Review study, East German industrial espionage in West Germany significantly reduced the gap in total factor productivity between the two countries. Everybody seems to be spying on everyone else, including the US and Israel, though each country highlights stories about their adversaries. Inter-company spying detailed by Wikipedia include Volkwagen on GM/Opel, Hilton on Starwood, and NetLogic on TSMC.
There are many cases alleging industrial espionage by China, including the theft of C-17 cargo plane and fighter jet data (USAF OSI); Huawei misappropriating T-Mobile trade secrets (MIT Tech Review); Chinese hackers indicted for stealing intellectual property, business plans, and negotiation strategies from US companies (MIT Tech Review); and the theft of seed technology from DuPont and Monsanto (MIT Tech Review).
[1] Etymology of Theogony and Genesis. Greek Θεογονία, theogonía, meaning generation or birth of gods, Liddell & Scott; from theos “a god” + -gonia “a begetting,” from gonos “birth,” from PIE root *gene- “give birth, beget,” Etymonline. Genesis, Greek from the PIE root *gene- “give birth, beget.”
[2] The shift in technology from providential gift to human invention reminds me of L.M. Sacasas’ trajectory from Providence to Progress to Innovation in “Secularization Comes for the Religion of Technology.”
[3] The Bray & Hobbins translation gives “Tubal-Cain . . . of the blade sharpener, of every smith of bronze and iron.” Bray & Hobbins note that the Hebrew text is difficult to interpret. They observe that the essential point seems to be “that these three in the genealogy of Cain are identified as innovators in raising livestock making music and working with metal.”
[4] 1 Enoch is believed to have been written between the 3rd and 1st centuries BCE, several centuries after the probable composition of Genesis during the Babylonian Exile in the 6th century BCE.
[5] Control of fire is a critical technology, providing warmth, light, a way to cook food, and a requirement for metallurgy. It predates Homo sapiens, with archaeological evidence that controlled burning took place 1 million years ago (Wikipedia).
[6] Jowett gives “Thus did Epimetheus, who, not being very wise, forgot that he had distributed among the brute animals all the qualities which he had to give,—and when he came to man, who was still unprovided, he was terribly perplexed. Now while he was in this perplexity, Prometheus came to inspect the distribution, and he found that the other animals were suitably furnished, but that man alone was naked and shoeless, and had neither bed nor arms of defence. The appointed hour was approaching when man in his turn was to go forth into the light of day; and Prometheus, not knowing how he could devise his salvation, stole the mechanical arts of Hephaestus and Athene, and fire with them (they could neither have been acquired nor used without fire), and gave them to man. Thus man had the wisdom necessary to the support of life, but political wisdom he had not; for that was in the keeping of Zeus, and the power of Prometheus did not extend to entering into the citadel of heaven, where Zeus dwelt, who moreover had terrible sentinels; but he did enter by stealth into the common workshop of Athene and Hephaestus, in which they used to practise their favourite arts, and carried off Hephaestus' art of working by fire, and also the art of Athene, and gave them to man. And in this way man was supplied with the means of life. But Prometheus is said to have been afterwards prosecuted for theft, owing to the blunder of Epimetheus.”
 |
| Techno-Goonies? |
Jokes about organizations shed light on how we think of them as entities, so I asked some LLMs. Here are the best. (I occasionally crossed out some LLM verbiage and replaced it with my own.)
I’m intrigued by the relationship between ogregores and individuals, such as between employee groups and leaders. The usual assumption is that the CEO directs employees, but I suspect employees can direct the CEO, too. That is, employees and CEOs can form a principal-agent loop.
A friend who owns a New York City apartment told me that he’s only responsible for maintenance “from the paint in.” I feel like the paint, squeezed between the physical and mental forces inside my body, and the social and physical forces outside.
Here’s my latest stab at a definition of myth: Myths are widely known stories that frame how groups of people think about, and act in, the world.
I want myths to include contemporary narratives and not just ancient tales, and this description does that. I’ll unpack the new definition and then give a list of stories that qualify as myths.
John Anderson's WSJ review of ‘Wyatt Earp and the Cowboy War’ on Netflix highlights the collective/corporate considerations behind the individualist mythologizing of the Old West.
In a profile of swing-state Wisconsin where affordable housing is a growing concern with voters, the Wall Street Journal quotes Kayla Lange, who’s struggling to make ends meet, saying, “It’s gotten out of control, and I blame the people in charge.” The story notes that voters ranked housing as their second biggest concern when it comes to high prices—behind only groceries—in a July WSJ poll. The trouble is that the people in charge don’t have much influence on the problem. Ogregores may be a better body to blame and try to affect.
Charles Fréger’s Yokainoshima: Island of Monsters and Phyllis Galembo’s Mexico Masks Rituals got me thinking about how people in different cultures represent the monstrous. Since Moderns don’t believe in ghosts and demons, so we demonize people. Non-humanoid monsters are relatively rare and examples, especially dire serpents, often live in the uncanny valley avoided by robot designers.
There has been non-stop coverage of President Biden’s frailties since the debate fiasco, examining the motives, actions, and opinions of Biden, people in his inner circle, party operatives, and donors. I’ve started trying to understand, instead, what the Democratic Party elite is up to. Collective agents are largely ignored in our obsession with individuals.
In Demons: Mediators between gods and humans, Egyptian mythology inspired me to think about entities that liaised between people and ogregores. But where do ogregores live?
There are often several versions of the same myth or legend. Although the characters are the same, their attributes and motives can vary. Sometimes a character is a hero, other times a villain. The plots can differ, too. It’s a reminder that stories, and perhaps the reality they reflect, depends on who’s telling the story.
My post Heroes not ogregores lamented that a top-tier newspaper’s coverage of Detroit focused on celebrities rather than systems—aka individuals not ogregores. However, a mythological approach also veers perilously close to personalization.
I had hoped that Ben Cohen’s recent WSJ story on the revitalization of Detroit would help me think about whether a city is an ogregore. Instead, as usual, it focused on people rather than institutions, and one person in particular. I imagine it’s easier to write a newspaper piece on deadline if you only have to interview a couple of people rather than digging into the subtle dynamics and complicated history of a complex system.
My inability to perceive big tech companies (and other ogregores) as potent presences worries me. They have godlike powers, and yet I don’t experience them as such. To understand the consequences, I asked GPT-4 and Gemini-1.5 Pro for examples from mythology and folklore of people who didn't see supernatural beings, to their detriment. The pickings were rather slim.
I watched the first Evangelion movie over the weekend. It tells of humans using giant robots (aka mechas; they’re called Evangelions, or Evas for short) to battle mysterious giant alien entities called Angels. Teenage children are needed to pilot the mechas. This symbiosis reminded me of being old, and corporations.
Paul Diduch has asked why I use the term ogregore rather than just calling a corporation a corporation, or an organization. He may be right. Most, though perhaps not all, things I call ogregores are organizations. I’ll argue that the categories of ogregore and organization overlap but are not the same. Paul suggested that an ogregore might be an organization with an eerie agent-like effect; it might also distinguished by being more powerful than run-of-the-mill organizations.
Thinking about what I might want to see in a tech & myth conference/workshop has led me to a goal formulation that also speaks to what I'm looking for personally.
Our dreams are different every night, but there are patterns (cf. Marie-Louise von Franz, endnote [1]). Similarly, while corporate PR spin—and other ogregore stories—is slightly different every time, there are perhaps patterns that reveal their deep motivations. In other words, PR could be a way to access an ogregore’s “psyche,” if it has one.
When the University of Colorado Boulder’s quantum computer came online recently, a diagnostic core dump revealed unexpected data. It seems to be fragments from the 2028 annual report of the so-called Boulder Ogregore Observatory (BOO), an institution that does not (yet?) exist.
Parts of the corpus are unintelligible and reconstruction is ongoing. Physicists speculate that the Observatory stored its data on a successor to the recently inaugurated Boulder quantum computer. Time-entangled qubits allowed the archives to worm their way back to the present.
The Martians in H.G. Wells’ The War of the Worlds (1898) resemble ad-funded social media companies in some ways.
