Bitcoin Forum

Just what it says. There's talk that there could be opportunities to build a brand-new society on another world in the near future (I won't go into details here but it looks like it could happen). What would you do if you were basically dumped on another planet with a few of your buddies and told to survive, and you decide that it's a prime opportunity to build a new society?

I'd make it so that no-one could erect a fence (and claim the space enclosed within for themselves). That would be a good start I reckon. Then we'd all be in it together from the off.

make it mandatory for young kids to meditate in school, from a young age. that shit will go a long way in helping people become fully responsible adults. it's been proven to develop certain parts of the brain, such as the part that makes you unfeeling for others (sociopaths).

All laws, taxes and government units would have EXPIRATION DATES. Nothing longer then 10 years. If it is a good law it will be re passed. They would not be done all at once or grouped together either. 

Remove money. Everything is done with a barter system or volunteering for the better of the community. Focus on technological innovation to do two things: automate all mundane jobs to free humanity to be creative, and to advance our space-faring capabilities. Minimal government to ensure people don't go murdering each other etc, otherwise stay out of the way.

I want details unless you mean Mars One.

Why the handicap?


When has this ever worked?  Both the part about a government staying minimal, and actually stopping people from murdering each other.

1st rule, there are no rules just traditions
2nd rule, see the first rule

I would probably play a few different simulation games like Civilization and try to optimize society based on the best parts of each civilization in history.
Might even separate areas to experiment with different ideas example China and Hong Kong two systems but one country but pushed further to one specializing in avionics and space development the other country agriculture and deep seafaring technologies.
Try different legal procedures and different laws within countries such as difference between Civil and Common Law or Even Sharia  and develop a system based on all three but using the best of it.
And have fun with society set minimum working age in different countries one 10 one 12 one 14 one 16 one 18
Same with consent and marriage
Then try different types of education systems classic example focus on math in asian countries focus on general arts and creative thinking in Western countries
Play with subsidization in some countries and remove it in others and see how people adapt and where they become the most creative since the brain is more malleable when young does it make sense to be innovative at a younger age and have people learn at older ages or is it better for education to be taught as it is and for the big wigs and corporate structure to be old and unchanging slow to innovate.
Goes into environmental structure so developing the right structure is worth a reanalysis to find and discover the best optimization settings.
Then Try developing a tech paradise in one city and an ecological efficient sustainable city in another.
Rebuild the internet make a mesh-net that uses computing power to try and develop plasma based engines and do formulas that would take significant man time but can be replaced with processing, aka organize big datasets into something useful like is being done with medical research
Replace oil energy with geothermal energy in the long run with solar becoming more efficient and using less energy in the production process
First by sticking rods around Volcanos then finding better processes to acquire the earths internal core temperature
Then using magnetic fields try to utilize that energy into a low density field to store energy since our current systems are limited by live current basically we can't store energy in signifcant amounts to solve that we need to concentrate energy for long durations of time. (Hard light) etc.
Develop new storage systems using DNA sequences to maximize the writing of data
Overall resulting in a bit of a mad scientist as I try to develop cryogenics in my quest for immortality and then creating an interactive virtual world that allows time to pass by faster in it than outside it example 1000 hours in VR is 1 day in reality allowing for more time to develop the outside society within a single human lifetime.

Oh some of this exists already but making scale and improving it is the goal :)
http://gameslikefinder.com/games-like-civilization/
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Superconducting_magnetic_energy_storage
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_national_legal_systems
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Malleability_of_intelligence
www.reed.edu/~mab/papers/fletcher.ab96.pdf
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Person%E2%80%93environment_fit
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_distributed_computing_projects
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geothermal_energy
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_data
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DNA_digital_data_storage
http://accelworld.wikia.com/wiki/Brain_Burst
www.shs.edu.tw/works/essay/2006/10/2006102810584206.pdf

Yes. I mean Mars One. Mostly I was just curious about what everybody thought about creating a brand-new society where our children and grandchildren will have to live with the consequences of the decisions we make now.

I would create a military society like sparta, clone millions of new soldiers. Create enterprise ships from asteroids then conquer and unite earth under one rule.

I will see to it all is treated as one and teach everyone to treat all in the world as his/her own.

Nothing will change.

The nature is harsh and competition is the only way to preserve "desire" trait of human/species.

Natural selection is just doing its job to weed out the inflexible.

accept bitcoin, legalize weed and prostitution (to attract tourists), enjoy the benefits :D

I'd make it kind of like Canada. Free health care, moderate taxes, and diversity.

Currency would be a custom crypto (Maybe), and I'd set up mandatory work requirements unless seriously disabled or sick, but those requirements can have an optional overtime, chosen individually.

I'm not sure what could be used to help the economy... Depends on geography.

I have to think about what else.

Reward system for right-doing versus punishment for wrong-doing...
So you turn the current 'person of interest' type mass spying operation from one being targeted at precrimes, and convert it to a system that rewards people with bitcoin who go through their day without either breaking the law or generally being an arsehole...maybe a weekly lottery of all those caught on surveillance doing good, 10 winners a week, 500 satoshi each...

Too many people are focusing on the political system of the new society.  The reality is that the political system will end up reflecting the population's inherent nature, sooner or later.

The solution is to carefully select your people.  Good genetics = good society.  Whatever traits you want society to have make sure that they are abundant in your founding stock.  Additionally you will want a sense of community, so make sure to select a small number of people, so that eventually everyone will have some sort of family connection to everyone else.  I might go with as few as 64 founders, assuming that we would have rapid population growth to cope with inbreeding concerns, though I would probably double or triple that just to be safe.  If population couldn't grow then I would select about 3000 founders.

All of the upthread comments are nonsense.

There is nothing you could do to make the new civilization have an outcome any different than the one we have already.

Read from the linked post on down to end of thread to educate yourselves:

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=495527.msg6864704#msg6864704

I live in a world of very dumb men. Sigh.  ::)

I disagree, we are bubble wrapping the planet to cater to idiots.  We need to take the safety devices off and let nature run its course. I agree that nothing will change though.  Humans are too greedy of a species.

We are quickly hitting a point of no return. Every species has an expiration date, and lets face it, humans are starting to smell.

Nature is running its course. See the revolutions and riots increasing all over the globe. Man is only under the illusion he is in control.

The herd will soon be culled.

Humanity will survive as long as there is an attainable frontier to reset the cycle from. Then repeat the hamster wheel collective madness again anew.

People are always trying to gain power, and no matter how much conditioning to believe in the system they get, many someones will try to, and eventually successfully, put themselves above everyone else.

Someone who has a superiority complex almost always has self worth issues. It's ironic yes but if we removed the self worth issues, the superiority complexes would probably go too. Also, what could be achieved by putting yourself in power that would be any better for you that the situation you are in now?

Exactly, which is why only my idea works.  My founding population would include only people who do not try to gain power, and whose parents did not try to gain power.  The people in my society would have no desire to rule over others.  I wouldn't need to condition them, they would be born that way.

Could you have an online community along these lines ? why does it necessarily have to be physical ?

On what grounds would someone gain access to such a community/society ?

I don't think any amount of conditioning can change human nature.

We reep what we sow - and a seed only grows in favourable ground

Absolutely nothing, but live and let live.

An online community where you can only gain admission through a rigorous family background check and where all members of the community agree only to marry other members of the community?  I guess it is possible, but people will be tempted to stray from the community, plus it won't be able to provide as much benefit.  Who wants to follow a bunch of strict rules... just to gain membership to a website?  It isn't worth it.

By making a physical community you can eliminate violent crime, and all of its associated costs.  For example Oslo would be a rape-free city if not for immigrants, because all of the hundreds of rapes committed there are committed by immigrants.

That counts me out anyhow, wether it be virtual or not - there are some right whacko's in my family. There are more black sheep in my family than there are white sheep  ;D

Well I think that human nature is only how we have learn to behave due to our surroundings and that the personality is a defense mechanism to reality.

Human beings are built-in "intentionally" (not literally but metaphorically, in the same sense that dogs are 'designed' with big ears for better hearing) to have low self-worth to get them to strive for better. We're competitive creatures. You can label that a pathology all you want and try to cure it until the sun rises in the west, it ain't gonna change.

It is an established scientific fact that personality is mostly genetic.

http://www.nytimes.com/1986/12/02/science/major-personality-study-finds-that-traits-are-mostly-inherited.html

I suppose you have proof of this?


Which means that if your little genetic cleansing experiment is to work, it would have to be carried out in an isolated location, but its not mostly genetic, its just over 50% attributed to genetics, the rest is the usual social forces at play.

I'm sure those ideas of yours though, have been tried many times, net result in most cases are crazy incestuous cultish communes, or political wise, crazy third reich-ists and their ideas of genetic ( racial ) purity.  

Any new society would have to take into account and come up with alternative solutions to deal with the usual human failings or else your little genetic social group would just start shrinking as you had to exclude members who break the rules.

You don't have access to google?  If you had actually attempted to do some research you would have found out that I was wrong.  It seems that muslim immigrants are committing only half of the rapes in Oslo.  Keep in mind that "only half" is still huge when you consider that they form only 1.5% of the population.  By simply sending these people back home they could cut the rape rate in half overnight.  However the elites don't want that, so it won't happen.  Pro-immigration = pro-rape.

The rest of your post is hysterics and catty attempts at insults.

I would take the concept of the amana colonies

"The Amana Colonies were one of many utopian colonies established on American soil during the 18th and 19th centuries. There were hundreds of communal utopian experiments in the early United States, and the Shakers alone founded around 20 settlements. While great differences existed between the various utopian communities or colonies, each society shared a common bond in a vision of communal living in a utopian society. "

First thing first is research. Before I even think about creating a new society, I need to do my homework on it all. What's my demographics? What's the average intelligence of my people? What the averaged skilled labor force like?

After I do my research on the people, I need to apply that knowledge to different sectors of life. There's a lot of research that'd need to be to optimize growth of the society.

Overall, I have no idea, at least at this time in my life. Maybe if I spent the next 5-8 years working on this single subject would I be able to tell you the most optimal solution to the question.

Oh you will know when I'm insulting you, I haven't tried to yet, so far I am just pointing out some rather large holes in your processing...


Well, being that you were the one making the outrageous claim, the onus is actually on you to back it up yourself with your research.


[sighs]
Using the same logic, I could posit these other false dichotomies (without bothering to check 'Google'...):
- half the rapes in Oslo are committed by people of other ethnicities, so pro multiculturalism = pro rape
- half the rapes in Oslo are committed by people of Muslim faith, so not being anti muslim = pro rape
- half of the rapists are capitalists, so pro capitalism = pro rape
- half the rapists are socialists, so pro socialism = pro rape
- ALL the rapes were committed by males, so if you are not anti-male, then you are pro-rape

and on and on....so to come to the false conclusion from lets say, the last false dilemma...
False conclusion = By simply sending all the males to Sweden, rates of rape in Oslo could be cut to zero percent overnight ( i.e. mass gender cleansing )

This type of black white thing is often categorised as fallacy of false choice, stemming from fear of the other, and is usually the driving force behind great human tragedies such as ethnic cleansing. Any new societal structure would need established at its tenets, the understanding of the dangers of the fear of others that leads to the formation of false dilemmas and when political power in enacted, on rare occasions leads to great human atrocities.

See quote below for why you are deluding yourself.

If you could control others, there would no longer be life and evolution, because competition would cease. A static system where everything is known a priori is in fact dead.

You have to allow for variance, e.g. in offspring.

I'll let my expert buddies do it

Everyone of the world would get a piece of land and everyone gets exactly the same amount of land.
With a house and everything you need or want, you will also have a farm with animals, to make your own food.
You will also have a growinghouse where you can grow your own plants, Weed included!
So everyone on the world will be self sufficient And no one will be jalouse because other people have more.
So no one has to steal, and we can live in peace and harmony.

I'd put only kind persons and philosophers on the planet. And of course only healthy people with beautiful appearance.

I'd say Nickenburg gets the point of this thread better than a few of the commenters here. The point was to see what YOU would do if you had the chance to create a whole new society from the ground up, not argue about the ills of existing Earth-based societies or bash each other over differences of opinion.

Thnx man, I once saw a video about this I only cant find it anymore, because I dont know the title.
And it said, That the world has enough land and resources to give everyone a equal piece of land
Give them everything they need on that land, they also said the goverments can do that but they wont.
The only want to create difference's between us to make us fight.

George carlin on that: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cgps85scy1g (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cgps85scy1g)

Not a problem. My personal opinion is that humans are good at finding reasons to fight. Even if you do divide up the land equally and give each person "forty acres and a mule," somebody somewhere will get upset that somebody else got a more fertile piece of land than he did. But at least you're on the right track here. Start people off on a roughly equal footing and see what they do with it.

The passage that you quoted seems to have no relevance to what I am talking about.  Please clarify what I am missing.

I would not control others, and there would be evolution.  What I would be doing is providing an excellent starting point.

Your point about variance is correct, but again I'm not trying to make a perfect society where everyone is 100% perfect all the time.  However if you started with excellent people who had excellent parents (meaning that the founders are typical members of families with excellent DNA, rather than exceptional people from families with mediocre DNA), chances are that the vast majority of their children are going to be excellent as well.  So yes, there will be jerks, maybe something like 1% of the population, but that is not so bad compared to Earth, which is something like 30% jerks.

How do you determine who is "kind?" Someone who gives away things and helps others? How do you know it's selfless and not for other nefarious reasons?

What constitutes beautiful? I've seen people that were beautiful to me that others disagreed with, and vice verse. What you're talking about is completely subjective.

Define excellent. Every definition you could make is either unspecific on traits or would be brittle in terms of resilience.

Fitness is not about your preferences, rather about adjusting to all possible outcomes which all occur eventually.

Coase's Theorem and the Second Law of Thermodynamics apply.

Refer to this:

http://unheresy.com/Information%20Is%20Alive.html#Algorithm_!=_Entropy (http://unheresy.com/Information%20Is%20Alive.html#Algorithm_!=_Entropy)

Excellent is whatever I want it to be.  I could have a formal standard or just go with my gut feeling.  It is just like breeding animals.  If you want a cow that makes more milk you carefully choose the cow and the bull based on production performance and pedigree.  If I want smarter humans I would carefully select people based on their IQ scores.


If I am the selection mechanism then, by definition, fitness is about my preferences.


No they don't.  You're throwing around words and concepts that you don't understand, and which have no relevance to my ideas.