A Resource Based Economy

[hugolp]

When they invented the calculator, calculators didn't take over math. Machines help us do things better and more efficiently. You also conveniently ignored the very text you quoted in which he said that this wouldn't be a machine dictatorship. Your ignorance and associated fear are propelling you to continue this nonsense. Please attempt to employ your critical thinking skills before replying.

He is not saying the machines are or will become the dictators. He is saying that the people that program the machine (or whoever decides how the machine is programmed) is in control.

If you answer to what he actually says, and not to what you imagine he says, the conversation will be more civil and productive.

[1715021461]

1715021461

[1715021461]

1715021461

[Findeton]

Honestly, there is no point arguing with this people. I have tried in other forums and they keep repeating the mantra. Logic does not work on them. They have a dream and they will follow no matter what reality says. Its sad, but I guess some humans work that way.

I do know that, it's just a sympton of them being part of a cult. They are persistent even when they're proven wrong again and again, they do not follow logic. As I said before, I'm not trying to free their minds from the cult, just trying to contaminate their posts with reality in order to prevent new people reading the thread from falling into the cult.

And I'm doing it just for fun. I love to argue with zealots, they are SO funny! They do not follow logic so I use logic against their arguments. It's just too much fun to miss the opportunity!

[Findeton]

When they invented the calculator, calculators didn't take over math. Machines help us do things better and more efficiently. You also conveniently ignored the very text you quoted in which he said that this wouldn't be a machine dictatorship. Your ignorance and associated fear are propelling you to continue this nonsense. Please attempt to employ your critical thinking skills before replying.

He is not saying the machines are or will become the dictators. He is saying that the people that program the machine (or whoever decides how the machine is programmed) is in control.

If you answer to what he actually says, and not to what you imagine he says, the conversation will be more civil and productive.

Exactly. Machines do not think, that's why machines cannot replace the complete political process nor every engineer, doctor, architect etc... And, also because machines do not think, machines won't become the dictators: it will be the ones who write their software.

As you say, he didn't answer to what I said, he answered to what he IMAGINED I said... because he didn't understand the fundamental aspect of my argument: machines do not think, they just follow orders, therefore someone controls machines (in this case, programmers).

[LightRider]

Honestly, there is no point arguing with this people. I have tried in other forums and they keep repeating the mantra. Logic does not work on them. They have a dream and they will follow no matter what reality says. Its sad, but I guess some humans work that way.

I do know that, it's just a sympton of them being part of a cult. They are persistent even when they're proven wrong again and again, they do not follow logic. As I said before, I'm not trying to free their minds from the cult, just trying to contaminate their posts with reality in order to prevent new people reading the thread from falling into the cult.

And I'm doing it just for fun. I love to argue with zealots, they are SO funny! They do not follow logic so I use logic against their arguments. It's just too much fun to miss the opportunity!

You have not once used logic in any of your posts that I have noticed, merely fallacious and baseless assertions. In fact, your continued assertions that I am in a cult prove that you merely have an agenda, not an argument. Your admission that you are not trying to have an argument or discussion, but instead trying to influence others also bears this out. You can call me all the names you want, but that just reflects poorly on you and your positions.

[LightRider]

When they invented the calculator, calculators didn't take over math. Machines help us do things better and more efficiently. You also conveniently ignored the very text you quoted in which he said that this wouldn't be a machine dictatorship. Your ignorance and associated fear are propelling you to continue this nonsense. Please attempt to employ your critical thinking skills before replying.

He is not saying the machines are or will become the dictators. He is saying that the people that program the machine (or whoever decides how the machine is programmed) is in control.

If you answer to what he actually says, and not to what you imagine he says, the conversation will be more civil and productive.

Exactly. Machines do not think, that's why machines cannot replace the complete political process nor every engineer, doctor, architect etc... And, also because machines do not think, machines won't become the dictators: it will be the ones who write their software.

As you say, he didn't answer to what I said, he answered to what he IMAGINED I said... because he didn't understand the fundamental aspect of my argument: machines do not think, they just follow orders, therefore someone controls machines (in this case, programmers).

Engineers, doctors and architects engage in technical processes that deal with pattern recognition and a database of knowledge. These are things that computers and machines are very good at. Machines and associated expert systems are now able to do many if not all of the things that these professionals do. Government is obsolete in my view, and I don't believe machines are well suited to that task. But they can be employed very successfully at resource management, tracking, monitoring and distribution. The emergence of open source software will also help ensure that whoever the programmers are, their code will be available for review. If you actually think about these ideas, you would understand how it makes sense. But you seem to choose fear and cynicism instead, and that makes me feel very sorry for you.

[Findeton]

Honestly, there is no point arguing with this people. I have tried in other forums and they keep repeating the mantra. Logic does not work on them. They have a dream and they will follow no matter what reality says. Its sad, but I guess some humans work that way.

I do know that, it's just a sympton of them being part of a cult. They are persistent even when they're proven wrong again and again, they do not follow logic. As I said before, I'm not trying to free their minds from the cult, just trying to contaminate their posts with reality in order to prevent new people reading the thread from falling into the cult.

And I'm doing it just for fun. I love to argue with zealots, they are SO funny! They do not follow logic so I use logic against their arguments. It's just too much fun to miss the opportunity!

You have not once used logic in any of your posts that I have noticed, merely fallacious and baseless assertions. In fact, your continued assertions that I am in a cult prove that you merely have an agenda, not an argument. Your admission that you are not trying to have an argument or discussion, but instead trying to influence others also bears this out. You can call me all the names you want, but that just reflects poorly on you and your positions.

Yeah, I'm a university student who's being paid by CIA, so I have an agenda. (btw: I'm just kidding, I'm not being paid by no one).

Engineers, doctors and architects engage in technical processes that deal with pattern recognition and a database of knowledge. These are things that computers and machines are very good at. Machines and associated expert systems are now able to do many if not all of the things that these professionals do. Government is obsolete in my view, and I don't believe machines are well suited to that task. But they can be employed very successfully at resource management, tracking, monitoring and distribution. The emergence of open source software will also help ensure that whoever the programmers are, their code will be available for review. If you actually think about these ideas, you would understand how it makes sense. But you seem to choose fear and cynicism instead, and that makes me feel very sorry for you.

First of all: now you've recognised what you NEGELECTED just two post before: you want to replace the political process with AI.

So now you acknowledge that those who wirte the software are the ones in control of the dictatorship. Do you actually know how a Free/Open Source project works? I'll give you one hint: it's not a democracy, there are some people who rule and control the code and they are not voted (normally, it will be either a "dictatorship" or a meritocracy).

Your ideas (meritocracy/aristocracy/dictatorship) are not new, but you try to conceal them to convince others.

Bitcoin is free software. And who controls the code? Some moderators, appointed by Satoshi (because of their merits as programmers, as judged by Satoshi). It's not a democracy at all, only (supposedly) "experts" will be able to control the software. Yeah that would be a dictatorship of those supposed expert programmers. It's an aristocracy/meritocracy.

[killer2021]

We already live in a resource based economy.

The major problem we have is the fact that the monetary system is transferring wealth from the bottom to the top. With each new dollar that is printed a little bit of your current dollars goes down in value. The wealth is transferred to bankers and Washington (who gets to spend the new dollars first).

With bitcoin this does not occur. Rather the money supply inflates very quickly early on but slows down over time. Eventually it gets to the point where the increase in new money being created is marginal and results in little or no inflation. The power to print money is returned to the people who ought to be the rightful owners of it. Bitcoin is the currency of the people.

Thomas  Jefferson said in 1802:
'I believe that banking institutions are more dangerous to our liberties than standing armies.
If the American people ever allow private banks to control the issue of their currency, first by inflation, then by deflation, the banks and corporations that will grow up around the banks will deprive the people of all property - until their children wake-up homeless on the continent their fathers conquered.'

What he is referring to is that the power of the printing press allows banks to create artificial booms and bust cycles. When you want to create a boom cycle you simply start printing lots of money, which the banks lend. This creates easy/cheap credit which businesses and individuals borrow. This also creates an artificial boom in the stock market/asset prices. When you want to create the bust you simply stop printing money or reduce the rate at which you print. This makes it difficult for people to repay their loans. As a result they default. When people start defaulting it sends panic in the market and you get a bust. It is at this very moment that banks will fire up the printing press once again and buy up large amounts of assets for cheap. This is what occurred in the great depression and the more recent 2006 housing bust.

There is also the problem of interest. All money put in circulation has been done so by borrowing it at interest from the fed. It is impossible to repay 14.5 trillion in loans from the fed if there is only 14 trillion total money supply.

"I believe that banking institutions are more dangerous to our liberties than standing armies.  Already they have raised up a moneyed aristocracy that has set the government at defiance. The issuing power should be taken from the banks and restored to the people, to whom it properly belongs."    Thomas Jefferson

When you use bitcoins rather than fiat currency you are returning the power of money back to the people.

Money artificially favors an arbitrary group of people, no matter how "free" it is. It is also entirely irrelevant to natural resources and processes. A true RBE does not require money because there is no way to conjure value or utility from an idea.

Well money is used to allocate scare resources. The only time money is not used to allocate resources is when the resource is too cheap to meter.

[4v4l0n42]

A lot of emotionality and baseless personal attacks. They don't bring anywhere, so I will address the very few points that some of you have actually raised, and ignore the meaningless insults.

As education rises the "natural" consequence is population decline? Prove it.

Correlation Does Not Imply Causation.

This also ignores a whole body of social and political theory and thought on the education system and its purpose in society.

There are more "educated" people on the planet that have been "educated" by the school system than in history. Yet the population continues to explode.

You obviously know nothing about the subject.

A quick search on google scholar will reveal hundres of published papers in the scientific literature that prove my point. But I'm guessing you were too busy with the insults and accusing me of being "unscientific" than to actually go and read the scientific literature.

I understand it may be difficult, but hey, science is not urban myths or common sense: science is what is real. You guys keep accusing us of pseudoscience, yet we produce scientific published papers and research to support our claims, whereas all you can say is: "you are a cult! this is crap." Really fucking scientific.

If you want to read a watered down version, because scientific publications are too difficult for you to read at the moment, you can consult the United nations Concise Report on "Population, Education and Development", which supports exactly what I say.

http://www.un.org/esa/population/publications/concise2003/Concisereport2003.pdf

[hugolp]

Engineers, doctors and architects engage in technical processes that deal with pattern recognition and a database of knowledge. These are things that computers and machines are very good at. Machines and associated expert systems are now able to do many if not all of the things that these professionals do. Government is obsolete in my view, and I don't believe machines are well suited to that task. But they can be employed very successfully at resource management, tracking, monitoring and distribution. The emergence of open source software will also help ensure that whoever the programmers are, their code will be available for review. If you actually think about these ideas, you would understand how it makes sense. But you seem to choose fear and cynicism instead, and that makes me feel very sorry for you.

Are you a engineer or a computer science guy? Do you even know how this things work?

[Findeton]

You obviously know nothing about the subject.

A quick search on google scholar will reveal hundres of published papers in the scientific literature that prove my point. But I'm guessing you were too busy with the insults and accusing me of being "unscientific" than to actually go and read the scientific literature.

I understand it may be difficult, but hey, science is not urban myths or common sense: science is what is real. You guys keep accusing us of pseudoscience, yet we produce scientific published papers and research to support our claims, whereas all you can say is: "you are a cult! this is crap." Really fucking scientific.

Population decline can be linked to education somehow. That statement is of no concern to me.

[Sjalq]

If money is such a terrible idea, why did it emerge in the first place? What purpose did it serve?

[jtimon]

A lot of emotionality and baseless personal attacks. They don't bring anywhere, so I will address the very few points that some of you have actually raised, and ignore the meaningless insults.

+1

As education rises the "natural" consequence is population decline? Prove it.

Correlation Does Not Imply Causation.

This also ignores a whole body of social and political theory and thought on the education system and its purpose in society.

There are more "educated" people on the planet that have been "educated" by the school system than in history. Yet the population continues to explode.

You obviously know nothing about the subject.

A quick search on google scholar will reveal hundres of published papers in the scientific literature that prove my point. But I'm guessing you were too busy with the insults and accusing me of being "unscientific" than to actually go and read the scientific literature.

I understand it may be difficult, but hey, science is not urban myths or common sense: science is what is real. You guys keep accusing us of pseudoscience, yet we produce scientific published papers and research to support our claims, whereas all you can say is: "you are a cult! this is crap." Really fucking scientific.

If you want to read a watered down version, because scientific publications are too difficult for you to read at the moment, you can consult the United nations Concise Report on "Population, Education and Development", which supports exactly what I say.

http://www.un.org/esa/population/publications/concise2003/Concisereport2003.pdf

I didn't read the scientific articles but here's my point.
I think the main cause of the smaller birth rates in developed countries are the higher costs of rising a child. Of course, education increases those costs and increases the ability of people to calculate those costs and the consequences of having a son for their own lives and for the child without having enough resources. Less educated people are more likely to have a child they can't educate.
But if having babies becomes free (as in free beer) because of the cornucopia that allow us to stop using money, I don't see another way to control population growth than to plan births, which scares me.

[Findeton]

I didn't read the scientific articles but here's my point.
I think the main cause of the smaller birth rates in developed countries are the higher costs of rising a child. Of course, education increases those costs and increases the ability of people to calculate those costs and the consequences of having a son for their own lives and for the child without having enough resources. Less educated people are more likely to have a child they can't educate.
But if having babies becomes free (as in free beer) because of the cornucopia that allow us to stop using money, I don't see another way to control population growth than to plan births, which scares me.

If that's your main concern for the ideology of the zeitgeist sect, I think you should join them...

[4v4l0n42]

Findeton, it seems that you much confusion in your head.

Let's approach this scientifically. List all the things that you think are wrong in a concise, coherent manner, point by point. Please refrain form ad hominem attacks and stick to the facts. And please, don't bring back redundant arguments that I've already addressed extensively.

If you can do that, we can have a discussion. If you don't, you are just shouting at the wind, with no sense nor purpose.

[jtimon]

I didn't read the scientific articles but here's my point.
I think the main cause of the smaller birth rates in developed countries are the higher costs of rising a child. Of course, education increases those costs and increases the ability of people to calculate those costs and the consequences of having a son for their own lives and for the child without having enough resources. Less educated people are more likely to have a child they can't educate.
But if having babies becomes free (as in free beer) because of the cornucopia that allow us to stop using money, I don't see another way to control population growth than to plan births, which scares me.

If that's your main concern for the ideology of the zeitgeist sect, I think you should join them...

What 4v4l0n42 says is not very scary. He has said that TZM:

1) Doesn't want to abolish money.
2) Doesn't want an AI dictator to rule.

I thought they were communist but it seems that at least not all of them are. If the cornucopia finally arrives I will be happy to drink from it. I just don't think that money will become obsolete, it will just change. I have to admit that I don't believe bitcoin solves all the money problems, but it's a big step forward taking the power back. I won't join TZM nor read the material. I've seen three documentaries and I had enough. But I like this talk with 4v4l0n42 because it serves me to later argue with a friend of mine who is likes this idea of resource based economy, although his definition is closer to communism (and at the same time more concrete) than 4v4l0n42's.

By the way, 4v4l0n42, does your definition of RBE fit with this one?

[Findeton]

Findeton, it seems that you much confusion in your head.

Let's approach this scientifically. List all the things that you think are wrong in a concise, coherent manner, point by point. Please refrain form ad hominem attacks and stick to the facts. And please, don't bring back redundant arguments that I've already addressed extensively.

If you can do that, we can have a discussion. If you don't, you are just shouting at the wind, with no sense nor purpose.

I'll explain it for normal people first:

- This sect advocates programmers to rule their society, because they'll write the software that would rule everything (even the political process). Of course, that is insane.

Now I'll explain it for cult followers:

- No software can THINK.
- Those who write the software control the software.
- The Venus Project advocates replacing every political process (and engineers, doctors etc) with AI software.
- Open/Free Software does not mean that the process in creating new software versions is democratic. At all. Not even close.
- Even creating some kind of "parliament" to control the software development would make no sense.
- Therefore the Venus Project's advocating a meritocracy, a dictatorship, an aristocracy or a mix of those terms.

[Findeton]

What 4v4l0n42 says is not very scary. He has said that TZM:

1) Doesn't want to abolish money.
2) Doesn't want an AI dictator to rule.

Ok:

1) What kind ofcurrency do they advocate?
2) What kind of democracy do they advocate?

[jtimon]

1) What kind of currency do they advocate?

None. They believe it will become useless in a post scarce economy.

2) What kind of democracy do they advocate?

Not sure. I guess a direct democracy assisted by computers and with internet voting or something similar.

[4v4l0n42]

I'll explain it for normal people first:
- This sect advocates programmers to rule their society, because they'll write the software that would rule everything (even the political process). Of course, that is insane.

Ehmmm, no, no, and no. I don't know what you have read or who did you talk to, but that is not what TZM advocates.

If you want to believe that other people believe weird shit and then try to make fun of those imaginary people you are free to do so, but it doesn't make it real.

Now I'll explain it for cult followers:

LOL.

- No software can THINK.

In the way you think, but it can certainly think in other ways. In some respect, much better than you can. But I'm guessing what you really mean is that machines don't pass the turing test, which I already explained how that is irrelevant for the sake of the argument.

- Those who write the software control the software.

Yes, and no. Do you have any idea how, say, Firefox or Drupal are developed?

- The Venus Project advocates replacing every political process (and engineers, doctors etc) with AI software.

For the third time:

TVP != TZM. So, stop associating the two. Venus Project bla bla bla, therefore TZM... is a non sequitur.

- Open/Free Software does not mean that the process in creating new software versions is democratic. At all. Not even close.

In fact, nowhere it's said the process should be democratic. It should a rational consensus based on scientific evidence, which is a completely different thing.

Look, it's really simple. If you needed to get you appendix taken out, would you hold a democratic vote, or would you ask various specialists and see if they agree or not?

Again, the problem is culture. As free, relevant education is given access to, more and more people will become knowledgeable and capable of understanding what's going on. As I already said, TZM promotes culture, not ignorance.

- Even creating some kind of "parliament" to control the software development would make no sense.

You propose nonsense, and then you say it's nonsense. Brilliant.

- Therefore the Venus Project's advocating a meritocracy, a dictatorship, an aristocracy or a mix of those terms.

For the fourth time:

TVP != TZM. So, stop associating the two. Venus Project bla bla bla, therefore TZM... is a non sequitur.

[4v4l0n42]

By the way, 4v4l0n42, does your definition of RBE fit with this one?

Loosely. That is only concerned with resource abundance, it tells little or nothing about sustainability and intelligent resource management.

This is a bit more comprehensive:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4mkRFCtl2MI

And the transcript, if you don't want to watch the video:
http://dotsub.com/view/9c2f8c32-f350-45fe-b053-7ad8dd526eec/viewTranscript/eng