Scrolls of Lore Forums  

Go Back   Scrolls of Lore Forums > Scrolls of Lore > General Discussion

View Poll Results: How will the future of the human race be?
The future will be great! 4 13.79%
Future will be good. 5 17.24%
About as good as now. 13 44.83%
Worse than now. 3 10.34%
There is no future. 4 13.79%
Voters: 29. You may not vote on this poll

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #51  
Old 01-26-2015, 10:47 AM
Aneurysm Aneurysm is offline

Problemsolver
Aneurysm's Avatar
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Here, there, and everywhere.
Posts: 9,333

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ragnahar View Post
So you're basically like, some kinda super hippy.
I guess you could say that. Humans are a cancer to our planet and anyone who isn't us.
__________________
My love for you is like a truck, berserker.
Would you like some making fuck, berserker?
Reply With Quote
  #52  
Old 01-26-2015, 10:49 AM
Gromak Gromak is offline

Eternal
Gromak's Avatar
Join Date: May 2014
Location: Germany
Posts: 4,989

Default

I wonder when in the futere the inevitable robot-uprising happens.
Reply With Quote
  #53  
Old 01-26-2015, 10:51 AM
Shaman Shaman is offline

Site Staff - Admin
Shaman's Avatar
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: The Barrens
Posts: 12,448

Haste

Other than something real like environmental damage to the planet or something crazy like a meteor/nuclear/zombie apocalypse, I imagine the future's going to be much the same as its ever been. Good people will do bad things, bad people will do good things, everything will look like its standing on its head and the world will keep spinning on. At every point in human history there have been people warning about the imminent end of days and every generation feels like its youth are the worst there's ever been.

Roll on 2050 if you ask me.

Last edited by Shaman; 01-26-2015 at 02:57 PM.. Reason: space
Reply With Quote
  #54  
Old 01-26-2015, 10:54 AM
miffy23 miffy23 is offline

Elune
miffy23's Avatar
Join Date: Nov 2013
Location: Vienna, Austria
Posts: 10,097
BattleTag: miffy#1110

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Shaman View Post
Other than something real like environmental damage to the planet or something crazy like a meteor/nuclear/zombie apocalypse, I imagine the future's going to be much the same as its ever been. Good people will do bad things, bad people will do good things, everything will look like its standing on its head and the world will keep spinning on. At every point in human history there have been people warning about the imminent end of days andevery generation feels like its youth are the worst there's ever been.

Roll on 2050 if you ask me.
Except that it's not hippies warning about "the man", or puritans warning about techology destroying humanity, it's science telling us hard truths in hard numbers *shrug*

History is not cyclical, and we are not repeating some harmless pattern here. We are continuing an exponentially accelerating spiral downwards.
__________________
El. Psy. Congroo.
Reply With Quote
  #55  
Old 01-26-2015, 10:58 AM
Anansi Anansi is offline

Master Worldbuilder
Anansi's Avatar
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: A Dying World
Posts: 18,136

Orb of Lightning

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ganishka View Post
There is no future, only the present and the records of what came before.

Once, there were three great stones, and they were named Past, Present and Future. This was back in the Dream Time, when everything was everything else. And everything could see everything through the three stones, Past, Present and Future.

Then one day Anansi the Spider was talking to his friend Coyote, and he saw the three great stones standing there, and he said "Coyote, I bet my teeth you could not eat that stone right there!" And Coyote laughed and said "Anansi, I bet you my teeth that I can!" And so Coyote stretched his mouth wide and swallowed the great stone named Future.

This is how the Dream Time ended and the world began, and how Spider lost his teeth, and how Coyote came to have so many, and why nowadays you can only see the Present and the Past, for the Future is trapped inside Coyote's belly.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by SmokeBlader View Post
And the HRE was a meme that went too far.
Quote:
Originally Posted by PajamaSalad View Post
You are pretty cool for being one of the bad guys.
Quote:
Originally Posted by BaronGrackle View Post
I was probably just upset about the Horde fleet in the Second War.
Reply With Quote
  #56  
Old 01-26-2015, 11:21 AM
Ganishka Ganishka is offline

Elune
Ganishka's Avatar
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Richland, WA
Posts: 8,297
BattleTag: Ganishka #1520

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by miffy23 View Post
I think a lot of people consider what you just described as our internal threat.
Only if you believe in the bullshit of Marxist economics.

You want an internal threat? Try chronic poverty spurred on by giving people only what they need to survive and denying them the ability to earn profit and elevate themselves to a higher standard of living by driving out businesses, and thus opportunities to enrich themselves. The result (or unintended consequence, if you prefer), of all Socialist ideas is the destruction of society through giving people what they "need" in the short term, rather than what they need in the long term. When you remove from people the ability to better themselves, they turn to fear and nationalism.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Aneurysm View Post
I've tried it already, but I'm too much of a chicken to go through with it. But if you've ever wanted to try and murder someone, you have my permission to kill me. As long as you do it relatively quickly.
Quickly? Where is the fun in that?! Being castrated and living for the next 50 years as a eunuch would be good enough in my book.

If you don't want to live, so be it, but I am quite happy existing at the moment, and thus don't wish to join you in your fool's gamble that their might be something better after death. It is a lot like being told that there is something beautiful and extremely valuable inside of a bag, but to find out what it is, you have to buy a chance to reach in the bag. There could be nothing inside, or there could be gemstones, or they might be rocks or a single gem among a bunch of rocks and you only get one shot. It could be sand, or gold powder. The point is, is that throwing away what you have in the present, for a possible future is stupid. It is why suicide is stupid. It is sad, but it is still born out of mental illness rather than rationality.
__________________

Quote:
Originally Posted by Darth Baras
A blind, deaf, comatose, lobotomy patient could feel MY ANGER!
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shadowordfun
The next time you feel like you're about to be triggered, put the barrel in your mouth.
Reply With Quote
  #57  
Old 01-26-2015, 11:30 AM
Aneurysm Aneurysm is offline

Problemsolver
Aneurysm's Avatar
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Here, there, and everywhere.
Posts: 9,333

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ganishka View Post
If you don't want to live, so be it, but I am quite happy existing at the moment, and thus don't wish to join you in your fool's gamble that their might be something better after death.
I really hope there's nothing better nor worse "after death". If I were to guess, and I'm pretty sure I'm right, after death you experience exactly what you experienced before you were born. In other words, nothing.

But that's not my point in this thread. My point is that humans are selfish pricks (granted not more so than other animals) that mess up the environments we live in, exterminate other lifeforms, drain the world's resources and so on, and I would much rather see (figuratively) a world where there are no humans, or animals with our means of destruction.
__________________
My love for you is like a truck, berserker.
Would you like some making fuck, berserker?
Reply With Quote
  #58  
Old 01-26-2015, 11:37 AM
miffy23 miffy23 is offline

Elune
miffy23's Avatar
Join Date: Nov 2013
Location: Vienna, Austria
Posts: 10,097
BattleTag: miffy#1110

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ganishka View Post
Only if you believe in the bullshit of Marxist economics.

You want an internal threat? Try chronic poverty spurred on by giving people only what they need to survive and denying them the ability to earn profit and elevate themselves to a higher standard of living by driving out businesses, and thus opportunities to enrich themselves. The result (or unintended consequence, if you prefer), of all Socialist ideas is the destruction of society through giving people what they "need" in the short term, rather than what they need in the long term. When you remove from people the ability to better themselves, they turn to fear and nationalism.
You think people need opportunities to profit at the expense of others, instead of everyone having their longterm needs fulfilled equally? Kk.

Also, again, an RBE or critisizing capitalism does not make you a communist or means you are proposing one (not that there's anything wrong with it). It's a simple difference between an economic approach that attempts to create sustainability and rational interaction with our environment, and those that don't. It has nothing to do with the political systems developed to distribute already scarce resources. Obviously, a communist system (by the way, that's not the same as "socialist", just fyi, you mix the terms a lot, but there's quite a big difference, most mainstream socialists in Western countries would raise an eyebrow if you called them communists) based on already scarce resources will lead to what you described. On the other hand, the current capitalist system has led to equally if not greater suffering due to the mechanics of the anarchocapitalistic system in action. Both systems are based on the flawed premise of engaging with suboptimal technology to either "win and secure before others do" (capitalism) or "share until there's not enough for anyone" (communism) instead of "try to create more and pool resources to create abundance for all, without the need to share or compete".
__________________
El. Psy. Congroo.
Reply With Quote
  #59  
Old 01-26-2015, 12:42 PM
Ganishka Ganishka is offline

Elune
Ganishka's Avatar
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Richland, WA
Posts: 8,297
BattleTag: Ganishka #1520

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by miffy23 View Post
You think people need opportunities to profit at the expense of others, instead of everyone having their longterm needs fulfilled equally? Kk.
Answer me this: what are everyone's long term needs? Who determines what they are? Who determines the most efficient way of obtaining them? How do you make sure there is no abuse, such as those in positions of authority dipping their hands into the proverbial cookie jar because they think that their "good work for the people" justifies them lining their pockets?

If you cannot answer these questions, than your beliefs are bunk and are little more than a Utopian dream.

Quote:
Also, again, an RBE or critisizing capitalism does not make you a communist or means you are proposing one (not that there's anything wrong with it).
Nothing wrong with believing in unicorns or alien shapeshifters, either.

Quote:
It's a simple difference between an economic approach that attempts to create sustainability and rational interaction with our environment, and those that don't. It has nothing to do with the political systems developed to distribute already scarce resources.
How do you define "sustainability" and "rational interaction" with our environment? There is no endpoint for advancement, so what happens when your needs outgrow the ability to procure the resources? Do people have a mandatory "expiration date" to make sure they don't take more than their fair share of time or resources? What about population? Do you purge people if they start to overpopulate, such as retiring the old and sickly young ones? What happens when people don't want to do it "for the greater good"?

Quote:
Obviously, a communist system (by the way, that's not the same as "socialist", just fyi, you mix the terms a lot, but there's quite a big difference, most mainstream socialists in Western countries would raise an eyebrow if you called them communists) based on already scarce resources will lead to what you described.
Communism is the end point of Socialism.

Quote:
On the other hand, the current capitalist system has led to equally if not greater suffering due to the mechanics of the anarchocapitalistic system in action.
Really? I must have missed all of those millions of starving people in every capitalist country.

Quote:
Both systems are based on the flawed premise of engaging with suboptimal technology
What is "optimal technology"? There is no endpoint to advancement, as wants are infinite. Today's super computers will be tomorrow's Macintosh 128K. When you get something, people want more. Being content is the death of evolution and life.

Quote:
to either "win and secure before others do" (capitalism)
Wrong. Capitalism is about trading wants. It is about proportional trade for what one wants. When you buy something, you trade what you have for what you want, such as money for food. You want the food more than the money, and the business wants the money more than the food. It is an equal trade where both parties get what they want.

Quote:
or "share until there's not enough for anyone" (communism)
True.

Quote:
instead of "try to create more and pool resources to create abundance for all, without the need to share or compete".
What a lovely contradiction. A logical bitchslapping, if you will. If you have to pool resources to meet everyone's needs, than all of those resources will be gone in a heartbeat unless you take to rationing it and choosing who lives and who dies. It is utterly impossible to meet only the needs of people, and to have abundance at the same time. It is a paradox.
__________________

Quote:
Originally Posted by Darth Baras
A blind, deaf, comatose, lobotomy patient could feel MY ANGER!
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shadowordfun
The next time you feel like you're about to be triggered, put the barrel in your mouth.
Reply With Quote
  #60  
Old 01-26-2015, 12:45 PM
PajamaSalad PajamaSalad is offline

Elune
PajamaSalad's Avatar
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Undisclosed location in the Universe.
Posts: 42,139

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by miffy23 View Post
Nuclear fusion is, by best estimates, roughly 4-5 decades away from becoming any kind of feasible solution to anything.
Not true.
Quote:
Oil is running out far earlier than that, especially with exponential increases in demand.
Not true either. When we find more innovate ways of extraction like fracking we can utilize more of it. Did you watch my video? People have been hysterically calling for the end of all resources for a long time and every single time they have turned out wrong.
Quote:
And you'd probably have an argument for us as a whole finding a way or an alternative, if it weren't for the circumstance that the current economic system and power structure is pretty dependant on us using a finite, and scarce, resource. So there's that roadblock, that has always been working to hold back alternative and sustainable energy development. You cannot really be blind to this.
I think you have invested too much personally into this idea of yours. You can't possible believe a simple collection of Youtube videos has enlightened you, especially when that is linked to 9/11 truther conspiracies.

Economics isn't a natural science which makes any discernment of truth difficult. There isn't going to be any sort of acceptance like gravity or electronic theory because it can't be empirically proven. Still I don't see how you don't find this completely ridiculous. People need to produce things. That is how nations get wealthy. If there is no incentive to produce things than people don't. Look how many people use government money to invest in education they are interested in but won't help their fellow human. All money does it encourage people to specialize and make bartering easier which is more efficient than the alternatives. Trade exchanges have to happen only if both parties agree to it. There is no exploitation.
Quote:
http://www.theguardian.com/environme...nuclear-fusion


On the topic of fusion...

"Cowley says it is unlikely fusion will become part of the world’s power generation before 2050 and Lockheed’s announcement does little to change his mind. “I can’t see any results. I mean what have they achieved? It’s all promise,” says Cowley. “The proof is in the pudding in science. I’m surprised that a company like this would make this kind of announcement without announcing any results.”

A press release by a corporation means pretty much nothing without academic peer review and publication of findings.

edit: forgot to mention that if and when fusion becomes usable, it will be in the military context first and foremost, and not a widespread solution to domestic energy requirements. So add another couple of decades to it becoming viable in other aspects.
Lockheed and Martin has proven results before and handled big projects like this. They have the talent. Academia is corrupt as hell and a major source of crank theories so I wouldn't take them as an absolute authority. It is because they exist in an environment where there are little consequences for being wrong. You can simply hold onto far more radical beliefs that would fail if applied in a real world situation but since it is such a controlled environment that may never happen. There is a reason why the scientific method has an experimentation stage. This phenomenon is mostly the liberal arts/humanities and social sciences but that is precisely what you are talking about here.
Reply With Quote
  #61  
Old 01-26-2015, 12:49 PM
neoshadow neoshadow is offline

Elune
neoshadow's Avatar
Join Date: Mar 2012
Posts: 11,395

Default

I dream of a day I can use nuclear fusion to make the perfect toasted pb sandwich.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by Aneurysm View Post
Neocat's got it all figured out.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gurzog View Post
I love you.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sakurako View Post
based neokitty
Quote:
Originally Posted by Aneurysm View Post

Shape up, Neocat. Fuck's sake.
Reply With Quote
  #62  
Old 01-26-2015, 01:02 PM
C9H20 C9H20 is offline

Elune
C9H20's Avatar
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 12,261

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Pajamasalad View Post
Yep people have been predicting the end of the world forever. Especially the end of Earth's resources.

Well that is just factually wrong. Peak Oil did occur in the United States just when predicted and oil production in the US has never reached that high. But that person glosses over that and cunningly tries to conflate global production (and hence global Peak Oil) with US Peak Oil and then pass it off as if it didn't happen.

And while that is just factually wrong, his entire lecture is shady and probably influenced either directly or via indoctrination by big business. It kinda reminds me of the "guy in a tie" syndrome, where people will believe a lot of things if they coincide with their preconceived notions and are delivered by some nebulous authority figure (the guy in a tie).

If you really want to engage in this discussion PJ, I would advise you to look at this documentary. It calmly and scientifically explains why the coming system crash is inevitable. And if you look at it and disagree? Well then be sure to come back here and tell us why.
Reply With Quote
  #63  
Old 01-26-2015, 01:04 PM
Yaskaleh Yaskaleh is offline

Eternal Watcher
Yaskaleh's Avatar
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: The heart of Scania
Posts: 18,625
BattleTag: Yaskaleh#1817

Default

Also, fracking is bad. of all shit we can do to mother earth, that is probably the most damaging.
__________________

Say no to genocide!
Save the Nightborne!
Reply With Quote
  #64  
Old 01-26-2015, 01:05 PM
miffy23 miffy23 is offline

Elune
miffy23's Avatar
Join Date: Nov 2013
Location: Vienna, Austria
Posts: 10,097
BattleTag: miffy#1110

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Pajamasalad View Post
Not true.

Not true either. When we find more innovate ways of extraction like fracking we can utilize more of it. Did you watch my video? People have been hysterically calling for the end of all resources for a long time and every single time they have turned out wrong.

I think you have invested too much personally into this idea of yours. You can't possible believe a simple collection of Youtube videos has enlightened you, especially when that is linked to 9/11 truther conspiracies.

Economics isn't a natural science which makes any discernment of truth difficult. There isn't going to be any sort of acceptance like gravity or electronic theory because it can't be empirically proven. Still I don't see how you don't find this completely ridiculous. People need to produce things. That is how nations get wealthy. If there is no incentive to produce things than people don't. Look how many people use government money to invest in education they are interested in but won't help their fellow human. All money does it encourage people to specialize and make bartering easier which is more efficient than the alternatives. Trade exchanges have to happen only if both parties agree to it. There is no exploitation.


Lockheed and Martin has proven results before and handled big projects like this. They have the talent. Academia is corrupt as hell and a major source of crank theories so I wouldn't take them as an absolute authority. It is because they exist in an environment where there are little consequences for being wrong. You can simply hold onto far more radical beliefs that would fail if applied in a real world situation but since it is such a controlled environment that may never happen. There is a reason why the scientific method has an experimentation stage. This phenomenon is mostly the liberal arts/humanities and social sciences but that is precisely what you are talking about here.
Right. So a military corporation is more truthful and upholds the standards of academic review better than the scientific community. Kk.

Why are we talking about conspiracy theories now? It has literally nothing to do with the idea of an RBE, or criticism of our economic system.

The incentive to "produce things" is the base need for them, PJ. It always has been. We grew produce because we needed it, we fabricated garments to keep us warm, as we grew safer and could spend the energy we used it for the development of our creativity and spirit in art, science and exploration. This hasn't changed, it's just that now the anarchocapitalistic system has driven the idea of "we need to profit to survive!!" into the brains of people so much that some of you seem to forget that we don't need the incentive of money to do what we must to survive.

The idea of an RBE is no specific political system, or ordering of society - all that would come as it may, however that may look. An RBE is nothing but the application of the scientific method and simple rational thought, as well as the longterm interests of us as a species, devoid of cultural, religious or political motivations, to our engagement with the environment and the facilitation of our needs. We simply don't need to live in a world where the majority lives in poverty and despair anymore, neither do we need to pollute and waste our resources the way we are. We have the means to provide for all, and to save our environment. We simply don't do it because the dollar sign has become more important than real life concerns. The money game is the delusion, PJ, not the concept that we can all work together.

As for nuclear fusion - if you read the article, most of the other international experts on the field are highly skeptical of any actual breakthrough, for good reason. I don't know why you think that Lockheed-Martin is somehow a good, pure organization with the interest of all in mind? You know they employ "corrupt academics" to develop this, right? Besides the long and dirty history of Lockheed-Martin, a prime example of the asocial, greed-based practices of big corporations...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lockheed_bribery_scandals

http://corporategreedchronicles.com/...ernment-fraud/

http://www.truthfulpolitics.com/http...able-lobbying/
__________________
El. Psy. Congroo.
Reply With Quote
  #65  
Old 01-26-2015, 01:12 PM
Anansi Anansi is offline

Master Worldbuilder
Anansi's Avatar
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: A Dying World
Posts: 18,136

Orb of Lightning

Quote:
Originally Posted by Aneurysm View Post
I guess you could say that. Humans are a cancer to our planet and anyone who isn't us.
Why do you say humanity is the cancer, and not life itself?
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by SmokeBlader View Post
And the HRE was a meme that went too far.
Quote:
Originally Posted by PajamaSalad View Post
You are pretty cool for being one of the bad guys.
Quote:
Originally Posted by BaronGrackle View Post
I was probably just upset about the Horde fleet in the Second War.
Reply With Quote
  #66  
Old 01-26-2015, 01:13 PM
Saranus Saranus is offline

Elune
Saranus's Avatar
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Hogwarts
Posts: 5,695
BattleTag: DrRobert#1475

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Pajamasalad View Post
Lockheed and Martin has proven results before and handled big projects like this. They have the talent. Academia is corrupt as hell and a major source of crank theories so I wouldn't take them as an absolute authority. It is because they exist in an environment where there are little consequences for being wrong. You can simply hold onto far more radical beliefs that would fail if applied in a real world situation but since it is such a controlled environment that may never happen. There is a reason why the scientific method has an experimentation stage. This phenomenon is mostly the liberal arts/humanities and social sciences but that is precisely what you are talking about here.
You don't think a corporation like Lockheed-Martin, who has massive lobbying power in our government could possibly be "corrupt as hell". They certainly have more clout than measly academia. Harvard spend some $530,000 on lobbying in 2014. Lockheed spent some $14,581,800 in 2014.
__________________
Now imagine a music, dear readers, heavy with cellos at a rapid staccato. Cellos held between thighs in a dark room. The little room of Harry's chest as he walks with his teammates to the opening gate of his first Test of Cribbage. They are a rag-tag group of champions, this bunch, and with Harry, the near-perfect new god, they know they will dominate the day. Harry is a world laced with rivers of wizardly blood. He is ready.
Reply With Quote
  #67  
Old 01-26-2015, 01:18 PM
Aneurysm Aneurysm is offline

Problemsolver
Aneurysm's Avatar
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Here, there, and everywhere.
Posts: 9,333

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Anansi View Post
Why do you say humanity is the cancer, and not life itself?
I could roll with that. Life overall is a benign tumor. Humanity, thanks to its' level of intelligence and self-awareness, is a malignant tumor.
__________________
My love for you is like a truck, berserker.
Would you like some making fuck, berserker?
Reply With Quote
  #68  
Old 01-26-2015, 01:42 PM
miffy23 miffy23 is offline

Elune
miffy23's Avatar
Join Date: Nov 2013
Location: Vienna, Austria
Posts: 10,097
BattleTag: miffy#1110

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ganishka View Post
Answer me this: what are everyone's long term needs? Who determines what they are? Who determines the most efficient way of obtaining them? How do you make sure there is no abuse, such as those in positions of authority dipping their hands into the proverbial cookie jar because they think that their "good work for the people" justifies them lining their pockets?
Everyone's longterm needs should be, I think, obvious. Safe and sustainable energy, free for all. Access to water, nutrition, housing, all your basic needs and education for all. Even more longterm, the bit-by-bit elimination of manual labor in favour of automation, as we gradually develop means of low-pollution industry.

As for who determines that, a democratic process among those qualified to make these decisions, as in the experts in their fields. Right now you have a group of scientifically often illiterate politicians making these highly critical decisions that have no clue what the ramifications of them are, usually driven by corporate lobbies for profit interests, and not the interest of the people they govern. Do you find that preferable? Do you think the status quo is actually good, in any way?

Whether you ask a Mitt Romney, Hillary Clinton, Obama, anyone, do you think a single one of them would know how to organize a sustainable production cycle with low to no pollution, how to maximize efficiency over profitability in our industry?`Please. I don't feel comfortable with these people making the decisions, I don't know why you do. We already know they largely disregard scientific input, corporate interests rule supreme.

Quote:
If you cannot answer these questions, than your beliefs are bunk and are little more than a Utopian dream.
See above.




Quote:
How do you define "sustainability" and "rational interaction" with our environment? There is no endpoint for advancement, so what happens when your needs outgrow the ability to procure the resources? Do people have a mandatory "expiration date" to make sure they don't take more than their fair share of time or resources? What about population? Do you purge people if they start to overpopulate, such as retiring the old and sickly young ones? What happens when people don't want to do it "for the greater good"?
Sustainability is very simply a sustainable method of producing, for example energy. Energy is at the heart of it all, really. If you can create safe, clean, abundant energy that is sustainable (hereby defined as fulfilling all of our needs for the realistically estimated lifespan of our entire species on the planet), then you've already solved more than half the problem, for it enables full-on automation of all manual labor, eliminates almost all need for a price system (since goods produced at no actual energy "cost" or labor cost are basically "free"), and unlocks unknown possibilities for our industrial and technological advance.

What you are talking about are fears of an autocratic regime making decisions for you based on "the greater good". Ironically, that's exactly what you're living in right now. What an RBE proposes is simple - we make the decisions together, based on scientific consensus, and what reason and science tell us are the best for everyone. That is objectively not really debatable, after this process, and could only be objected to by those that wish to obtain power over others. Obviously, those would have to be stopped - unlike now, were these people that are drawn to power are de facto in power.

What would you not want to do in this scenario? I think you keep thinking of Soviet Russia and being forced into lines of meal tickets. Again, that's an autocratic regime allocating limited resources. Not what an RBE is talking about in the slightest.

What would we do now when we need more energy, more production, more housing? Nothing, really, because companies that will pick up this slack will only do so if profitable, and that's not always the case. When they do, they do this suboptimally, inefficiently, to save costs and maximize profits. That's not in anybody's interest but the profiting party's.

What are you talking about with "purging the old and the sick"? Seriously. I'm talking about a simple rational approach to dealing with our resources and reforming our economic system. How do you reach this point where using common sense to deal with our needs means that we "kill the undesirables" in your mind? In the interest of all means in the common sense, humanistic interest of us ALL as a species, regardless of your age, gender or race.


Quote:
Communism is the end point of Socialism.
Sorta. Not really. Communism is the full-on implementation of a socialistic system in economic production and distribution as well as the government, a Western socialist doesn't believe in the communistic organization of labor and government, however.

It's like saying that anarcho-capitalism is the end point of the barter system, which also isn't really true. There is too much connected to the terms to boil them down in such a way.

Quote:
Really? I must have missed all of those millions of starving people in every capitalist country.
It seems you have. http://www.wfp.org/hunger/stats

Quote:
What is "optimal technology"? There is no endpoint to advancement, as wants are infinite. Today's super computers will be tomorrow's Macintosh 128K. When you get something, people want more. Being content is the death of evolution and life.
Striving for optimal efficiency, would be the better term. Which is what we do not do currently. We waste and cut corners for profit, instead of producing efficiently and sustainably. Long term considerations are secondary in the corporate world.

What wants are infinite? The wants for food, shelter, water? They're not. Neither are our energy wants infinite. Our spiritual, intellectual, social wants may well be infinite, and our technological capabilites will ever evolve. And so we develop as a culture.

The West is "content" by your definition. By your own definition, the West is progressing however. So which is it?

Is the Third World just not unhappy enough to get their act together and "evolve already", or what?


Quote:
Wrong. Capitalism is about trading wants. It is about proportional trade for what one wants. When you buy something, you trade what you have for what you want, such as money for food. You want the food more than the money, and the business wants the money more than the food. It is an equal trade where both parties get what they want.
This is the basic example of a capitalistic exchange that works in a vacuum. However, in the real world, you cannot disregard the hundreds and thousands of factors that play into this equation. Who created what you want to buy? Under what conditions and why? Is he/she being paid fairly by what you give? Is the food you receive for your money enough? What is the money worth you are using, and will you still receive the same mount of food for this quantity of money tomorrow? The reality of capitalism is that in almost no circumstance do both parties get what they want equally, and that one party almost always benefits more than the other. What you are describing is a basic barter system where each party knows the needs of the other, and both sides are happy with the trade.

A company selling you an iphone is not quite the same. It is selling you a purposefully inefficiently created product, that you are animated to want through manipulation, at a higher price than it's actual value, based on cheap labour. This is not an exchange of equal wants. It is one side manipulating you into giving power and control (money) in exchange for something basically meaningless, in the long term.


Quote:
What a lovely contradiction. A logical bitchslapping, if you will. If you have to pool resources to meet everyone's needs, than all of those resources will be gone in a heartbeat unless you take to rationing it and choosing who lives and who dies. It is utterly impossible to meet only the needs of people, and to have abundance at the same time. It is a paradox.
I think you missed the point where an RBE is to strive for methods of creating abundance and sustainability for all, not of forcing everyone to share whatever we have pooled together. Your right, your interpretation is a paradox, because you misunderstood the concept.

Our recources wouldn't be "gone in a heartbeat" when we develop methods to produce more than we need. Let's take money, right now. The richest % in the world possess enough money that we could use to supply every single person in the world with basic living needs and education right now, several times over, with plenty to spare. But we don't. Basically, a fraction of the world's financial assets could be used to turn most of our energy green, to develop sustainable farming methods, to provide efficient housing and basic education, to develop clean and sustainable automated production of efficient goods.

This isn't science fiction, this is possible right now.

And an RBE is a system where we start striving for the application of these possibilities, disregarding profitability, politics, religion to create better conditions for all in the long term, and not for one group short term at the expense of our environment and/or another group.

Do you not find this concept worthwhile?
__________________
El. Psy. Congroo.

Last edited by miffy23; 01-26-2015 at 01:52 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #69  
Old 01-26-2015, 02:00 PM
Anansi Anansi is offline

Master Worldbuilder
Anansi's Avatar
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: A Dying World
Posts: 18,136

Orb of Lightning

Quote:
Originally Posted by Aneurysm View Post
I could roll with that. Life overall is a benign tumor. Humanity, thanks to its' level of intelligence and self-awareness, is a malignant tumor.
Growing on what? The inert planet?
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by SmokeBlader View Post
And the HRE was a meme that went too far.
Quote:
Originally Posted by PajamaSalad View Post
You are pretty cool for being one of the bad guys.
Quote:
Originally Posted by BaronGrackle View Post
I was probably just upset about the Horde fleet in the Second War.
Reply With Quote
  #70  
Old 01-26-2015, 02:09 PM
Aneurysm Aneurysm is offline

Problemsolver
Aneurysm's Avatar
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Here, there, and everywhere.
Posts: 9,333

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Anansi View Post
Growing on what? The inert planet?
Obviously. And possibly on other planets such as our own, as well as on moons and inside asteroids.
__________________
My love for you is like a truck, berserker.
Would you like some making fuck, berserker?
Reply With Quote
  #71  
Old 01-26-2015, 02:11 PM
Hammerbrew Hammerbrew is offline

Banished
Join Date: Dec 2013
Posts: 9,773

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by miffy23 View Post
Our recources wouldn't be "gone in a heartbeat" when we develop methods to produce more than we need. Let's take money, right now. The richest % in the world possess enough money that we could use to supply every single person in the world with basic living needs and education right now, several times over, with plenty to spare. But we don't. Basically, a fraction of the world's financial assets could be used to turn most of our energy green, to develop sustainable farming methods, to provide efficient housing and basic education, to develop clean and sustainable automated production of efficient goods.

This isn't science fiction, this is possible right now.

And an RBE is a system where we start striving for the application of these possibilities, disregarding profitability, politics, religion to create better conditions for all in the long term, and not for one group short term at the expense of our environment and/or another group.

Do you not find this concept worthwhile?
Sure, but it's also naive and not going to happen in the real world.

Does that mean we shouldn't try improve things for everyone? No, of course not, but that doesn't change the fact that is Science Fiction, or may as well be.
Reply With Quote
  #72  
Old 01-26-2015, 02:28 PM
Anansi Anansi is offline

Master Worldbuilder
Anansi's Avatar
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: A Dying World
Posts: 18,136

Orb of Lightning

Quote:
Originally Posted by Aneurysm View Post
Obviously. And possibly on other planets such as our own, as well as on moons and inside asteroids.
What's wrong with cancer?
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by SmokeBlader View Post
And the HRE was a meme that went too far.
Quote:
Originally Posted by PajamaSalad View Post
You are pretty cool for being one of the bad guys.
Quote:
Originally Posted by BaronGrackle View Post
I was probably just upset about the Horde fleet in the Second War.
Reply With Quote
  #73  
Old 01-26-2015, 02:30 PM
Aneurysm Aneurysm is offline

Problemsolver
Aneurysm's Avatar
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Here, there, and everywhere.
Posts: 9,333

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Anansi View Post
What's wrong with cancer?
Not much, at least not until it starts spreading and corrupting everything it comes near.
__________________
My love for you is like a truck, berserker.
Would you like some making fuck, berserker?
Reply With Quote
  #74  
Old 01-26-2015, 02:32 PM
Anansi Anansi is offline

Master Worldbuilder
Anansi's Avatar
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: A Dying World
Posts: 18,136

Orb of Lightning

Quote:
Originally Posted by Aneurysm View Post
Not much, at least not until it starts spreading and corrupting everything it comes near.
What is there to corrupt in a lifeless universe?
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by SmokeBlader View Post
And the HRE was a meme that went too far.
Quote:
Originally Posted by PajamaSalad View Post
You are pretty cool for being one of the bad guys.
Quote:
Originally Posted by BaronGrackle View Post
I was probably just upset about the Horde fleet in the Second War.
Reply With Quote
  #75  
Old 01-26-2015, 02:37 PM
Aneurysm Aneurysm is offline

Problemsolver
Aneurysm's Avatar
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Here, there, and everywhere.
Posts: 9,333

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Anansi View Post
What is there to corrupt in a lifeless universe?
Who is there to spread the corruption in a lifeless universe?
__________________
My love for you is like a truck, berserker.
Would you like some making fuck, berserker?
Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
abandon eurasia, depends where you live, discussion, mad ramblings, poll, speculation, the future

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 09:50 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2021, vBulletin Solutions Inc.