Bitcoin Forum

The Game Theory of potential World War 3 is bigger than international politics.

Over many years, the world has become divided most strongly between Statists and Brainists, a trend accelerating toward a dangerous conflict.

Statists act toward the world organized top down, a central authority which expands into any part of the world it does not yet control.

Brainists act toward networking people and tech together more like a global brain.

Neither of these groups normally calls themself that and often are not aware of the effects of their actions, thinking more about local short term effects, but sticking our heads in the dirt does not change where this all leads. Lets not focus on who to blame, instead learn what is happening and what can be done about it.

Below are 2 incomplete lists of parts of the world strongly tending toward Statism or Brainism.

===Statism===
most big political parties
most corporations
most governments
Internet Kill Switch
Military Industrial Complex, a feedback loop
legal systems which cause paperwork (or electronic) to increase exponentially
propaganda that voting is a practical way to get big things done
printing money which devalues everyone else's money of that type
monopoly strengthening laws regulating the forming of new kinds of economies
Cyprus scandal taking money directly from bank accounts for bailout
Owning of ideas and regulating the means of production
Patent Trolls
Client/Server religions where god commands those below

===Brainism===
social networking
Wikipedia
Wikileaks
Libertarian
open source
Bitcoin
Zeitgeist
3d printing, especially of gun parts, circuits, and medical devices
wireless mesh networks used when Internet is shut down in a country
Anonymous
Freedom of sharing ideas and how to build things
Pirate Party
Peer To Peer religions where we each work toward becoming more like gods

Please help complete the lists or argue for moving items from one to the other.

Based on these 2 trends accelerating, I see no way around a conflict. One must weaken and the other strengthen. The question is what kind of conflict will it be, a smooth transition to a new way of organizing the efforts of 7 billion people toward common goals, or a global scale escalation of violence like the small example of the (attempted?) bombing of Cyprus bank responding to a new height of ways Statists take money from people, directly from their bank accounts after freezing them all in the country. Whats most dangerous about that small event is more people just observing are saying the bombing was justified, a very dangerous state of mind for a world to be in. This is not an isolated event. Its a pattern of many violent responses to advances of Statism.

For most of Human history, Statism may have been the only practical way to organize things on a large scale, but with the Internet and many new forms of global communication and measuring and automating things, Brainists don't need Statists as much anymore and eventually will not need them at all. Statists see Brainists' lack of dependence as a threat, but no group has the right to force dependence. In USA, for example, such a conflict resulted in the Declaration Of Independence. A similar conflict is accelerating on the largest scale ever, between Statism and Brainism.

I really believe "The pen is mightier than the sword", so when I see terrorism I think what a waste because they used a weaker weapon than they could have. Something big has to be done, but its going to take a bigger networking of minds together this time.

I've seen this coming for years and have been working on a variety of open source tech to network minds together. Other people have been working on their own possible solutions. Its time to take this seriously, because the Game Theory of potential World War 3 is bigger than international politics, and we're all at risk and may have something to contribute toward a global solution.

People who build tech have the power to force the issue, and we should to make sure its solved before it comes to World War 3.

I suppose it makes sense, categorizing these two groups broadly.  As people, we have this weird thing where we just love duality--two of everything!  But it's easy to understand, and I lean way far onto the Brainist side of things :P

A big thing about Statists is that they love taxes, or at least believe taxation is absolutely vital for a society to survive--so at the same time, they both believe in government, and big government at that.  So on the Statist side would be "Tax" and following, "Government".  For the opposite effect, the Brainists will probably favor small government or Anarchism, and no-taxation (I can't think of a word for voluntary taxation--it's an oxymoron, anyway.)

Aside from that, I'll think up some more.  I'd like to say, WW3 can't happen if there are no soldiers to make it happen, but, mechanized warfare doesn't seem that far away.  Both Brainists and Statists contributed to that effort.

Please don't encourage him.

Something I don't know? :o

Nothing a perusal of his post history (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=25861;sa=showPosts) won't show....

I have in the past written some crazy sounding things and speculated too far ahead and got too excited about things, but this thread is about something I've been watching and thinking about for a long time, and if you have nothing to say about these ideas then you are off topic.


charity

Those two, IMO, don't belong with the rest.

But yes, Anarchism and Charity are definitely the counterpoint to Government and Tax.

WW3 between these two groups is not something I'm concerned about. The latter group will simply make the former irrelevant.

Anarchism is no organization. Brainism is organized like a global brain. Something is not anarchist just because its not statist.


When the statists see that coming, as its already in progress, what does that motivate them to do? Do you think these central powers will peacefully stand by and watch while they become "irrelevant" or obsolete?

What would you call a group of people who identify as Anarchists?  :P  Seems pretty organized to me.  A group of atheists don't count as a group because none of them are theist?

Most anarchists may also be brainists, but most brainists are not anarchists.

What are most brainists?

Wrong. Anarchism is no Rulers. No states. No governments. Not no organization.

And which brain cell is the one that tells all the others what to do? Which lobe of your brain is "in control?"


Ever tried to nail Jello to a wall? Combating a decentralized force is kinda like that.

A brainist society would be ruled by ideas and those most skilled in explaining them in whatever form, a meritocracy. Waves in prices of stock markets are brainist. They are ruled by the collective mind of billions of people.


They have found brain cells that activate when seeing a certain person or object, literally a Bill Clinton cell for example when people see his picture, but seeing that picture controls the cell as much as the cell controls pattern recognition of other Clinton related things. Its a network, not a hierarchy.


Yes, but I want to avoid as much jello smashing as possible.

Pfft, I don't know any "brainists" who enjoy getting screwed by their govs.

I'm out!

snapsunny what are you talking about?

Bingo! And now, what would you call a non-hierarchical society? (Don't cheat and say brainist)

That's kinda my point. The jello will avoid being smashed on it's own. It doesn't need your help. Unless, of course, you were planning on going to the world's governments and try to convince them of their obsolescence? If you want, be my guest, but I don't think you'll get a great reception.

It's not the "jello" I'm worried about. It's all the people who would just like to get on with their daily lives, and not be bothered. Trying to smash the "jello" is much more likely to hit them.

Taxation is a Statist ideal.  A government does not thrive without taxation of some form to keep it afloat.  Ergo, anyone who is not a Statist, cannot support taxation, and cannot support government of any kind.  The government is the state.  Anarchism is lack of state.  There's a line to be drawn here.  If we're implying Brainists are completely fine with being Statists simultaneously, I don't see any real reason to make a distinction between the two, but I don't see how the two could work out.

Brainism, statism, and anarchism are 3 different things. A brainist society could, for example, influence people not to have larger weapons by denying them trade or resources or however other people can be influenced to act with them. It is capable of doing anything a statist society can do except it usually would not because of its decentralized way of thinking.


The demand to and obedience of mtgox to freeze accounts where large amounts of bitcoins couldn't be traced to identities is an example of "jello smashing". Its already started.


Tax is not the only way to fund things. Free markets have succeeded at that many times. In any meritocracy capable of effective global communication, large groups of people can agree on what they will trade for what benefits.

I was just going to watch this thread, but decided to make some popcorn and stay awhile. One BenRayfield post is like a week's worth of facebook.

And for the record, I make no attempt to pass myself off as 'normal'. :P

blablahblah, my strong interest in this subject comes mostly from my research in artificial intelligence specializing in theoretical ways to network minds together based on neuroscience theory, which at this point is not far along enough for formal papers. just a few prototypes and components. This has given me insight into the game theory of global events, which I'm trying to explain.

Many words, saying nothing. Try again. Maybe using fewer words. What would you call a non-hierarchical society?

A proposal to oversimplify? No thanks. I could call it a few things, decentralized, peer to peer, brain-like, networked. You appear to want me to call it anarchy, maybe so its easier to attack my ideas by redirecting all the attacks on anarchy toward them. Most people are against anarchy, so thats obviously not going to happen. Something important has to be different, and its the networking of minds like a big brain.


These are 2 of my better writings on how Human intelligence works:
http://www.kurzweilai.net/forums/topic/input-and-output-paths-between-ideas-are-subconsciously-chosen-every-few-seconds
http://www.kurzweilai.net/forums/topic/how-human-intelligence-works

I think consciousness is any self referencing self modifying oscillating system, like a flowing form of quine. There are many math operators known to be Turing Complete (capable of general computing, all possible calculations if given enough time and memory), including NAND, Rule 110, and Conway's Game Of Life cell update rule, and from my own research the Sums To One constraint as found in the weights of a bayesian node or half those weights and the opposite conditional for example. The important part of Sums To One is it can simulate the others but continuously, kind of between digital and quantum kinds of computing. It flows smoothly. Consciousness in that context would be a network of Sums To One constraints (or NAND etc in analog form) which processes its own source code and flows evolutions of it. In brains, the closest process to that is thinking about thinking.

You haven't read any of what I have posted on here, have you?

Not surprising, really, since you mainly use this as a blogging platform.

One thing I note is missing from your list of words is "governed". Don't be afraid to use a word if it fits.

Please define "governed" without using any words that also apply to Statism, and if you can't, then I'll be happy to continue using the word "statism" and say that brainism is not statism.

That's kinda my point, and exemplar of all my problems with trying to talk to you.

I should have known better than to get involved in this.

This is mixing up two different topics. The Invisible Hand need not be a super-brain using unseen technology. It beats monolithic top-down systems even with normal humans and various sets of rules that are even known suboptimal.

But a World War 3... I'm skeptical. The non-statist intellectuals are mixed in with societies everywhere and badly organized. It doesn't take more than a little police action to end such a "war" today.

If there were a segregation in terms of countries, I doubt the window of opportunity for statist attacks would be very long. IMO, modern society's productive output is at a fraction of its potential. A country utilizing that difference should not be a viable target to bully.



Bottom line, it all comes down to organization. Most non-statists are horribly organized and split into various groups that often have unsustainable ideas. For example, I know hardly anyone who believes in the same solutions as I do. That leaves me with the options that I'm either as crazy as the rest or that almost everyone has no clue about the real solutions. It's rather grim either way. Without a more orderly approach there won't even be anything to side with or against.

blablahblah,
Space, time, mass, and energy are all the same kind of thing, can be converted to eachother. Black hole equations define that conversion ratio. I see lots of evidence for metaphysics but no evidence of dualism which is the theory that there are 2 incompatible parts of the universe which can not be converted to eachther. By Occam's Razor, I say consciousness is made of that same one thing, but not just in the limited shapes we've seen so far, also in high dimensional multiverse shapes like the Quantum Foam physicists say spacetime is made of.

I see no need for an "outside observer". Quoting what I wrote 2 other places about this, I'll explain how the universe is consistent without anything being outside, and that by universe I mean "everything that exists" so if something existed outside it would by definition already be part of the universe. But as you said that's getting too much into semantics, and I think we're mostly agreeing and both trying to find more accurate words than "god" which also refers to many things we don't mean.

The "philosophical zombie" may appear Human in all ways we can measure with current tech, but my claim is there is no part of reality completely out of reach of any other part of reality, so if a zombie fully duplicates every quantum entanglement and other high dimensional shape which form something, it also duplicates the consciousness. The only other option is dualism and I see no evidence for it.

http://www.kurzweilai.net/forums/topic/we-all-hold-a-world-view-what-is-the-first-proposition

In the next quote I try to explain in the most technical way how the metaphysics connects to the rest of my brain theory:

http://www.kurzweilai.net/forums/topic/how-human-intelligence-works

You misunderstand what I mean by people thinking more like a global brain, networking ideas and patterns of thought through the Internet, optionally using EEG based game controllers as a higher bandwidth version of mouse, keyboard, screen, and speakers as the inputs and outputs. The flow of information between the subconscious minds is more important than how direct the interface is. You write about unbalances like "slavery/indentured servitude in the name of blind progress is far more efficient than letting people twiddle their thumbs and "enjoy life"", but slavery is about the least efficient way of organizing people there is. Brains do not tend to waste resources. Laziness is a great way of not spending resources, except when there are important things to be done. The nature of a brain is self balancing.


Brains evolved to predict mostly linearly. They are terrible at exponential patterns, like waves in the most divergent stock prices. If it happened as the world is today, I would agree, but I'm predicting based on the feedback loop of statists regulating stronger and regulating more things as a reaction to brainists, and brainists inventing more ways to network minds together despite those regulations. Its a fact of history that statists see networking minds together as a threat on the level of revolution taking over a small country at least, because that's exactly what happened in Egypt through social networking, then they got really serious about the Internet Kill Switch. It happened because their leader was a terrorist who organized mass killings of Egyptians and other things. Facebook and Twitter are a big part of how the problem was solved.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/02/11/egypt-facebook-revolution-wael-ghonim_n_822078.html

Brainists will not allow our global neural connections to be cut as its literally a form of brain damage to our global brain. People don't say it that way, but thinking about the world as already a global brain not much self aware yet, its actions are easy to predict. It will defend itself similar to how corporations defended themselves by protecting "corporate personhood" and laws that allow them to lobby (put money to politicians which statistically has the effect of outputting laws favorable to those corporations). Statism and brainism are 2 life forms which each feel the need to defend themself. Did you take that it into account in your predictions?

The brain, as a biological neural network, is a device which constantly rewires itself using STDP. Social networks do the same.

First idiotic thing: All the anarcho freaks just can't seem to get their tiny brains around the fact that out of anarchy will arise hierarchy.

Second idiotic thing: A true anarchy does not care about anything or move to create unified fronts to solve problems. It's only the individual units doing their own thing, satisfying their own needs, blissfully ignorant of larger problems, such as resource depletion, destructive non reversible transformative processes, etc.

Telling it like it is.