|
Yuli Ban posted:it's not up to me to figure out how to organize society. I'm not even asking for anyone to do anything. I'm just creating a catch-all term for all those drat buzzwords. I thought you were trying to "create a new theory of social and economic organization"?
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2017 19:27
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 19, 2024 07:38 |
|
|
That's not an idea you moron. That doesn't get us anywhere, that doesn't inform anyone on anything. It's loving worthless. If all you have to say is "hurrr i think people should own the stuff" and that's loving it, you don't get to smugly quote your own reddit links when somebody points that out. Hope. That. Helps.
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2017 19:30
|
|
|
Helsing posted:I thought you were trying to "create a new theory of social and economic organization"? But I did. Sorta. Kinda. All those buzzwords revolve around a reaction to automation (often with quite a bit of post-scarcity economics thrown in), so the -ism is meant to describe what it is they're all scattershottedly aiming at— we're automating labor in all its forms, and we're moving towards an era where mental automation is a thing? It seems that the most common idea behind this is that we should find a way to spread about ownership of the machines that are replacing human workers. Some might think of more capitalistic solutions; others might come up with more socialistic solutions (I'm of the mind it's inevitably going to be socialist in nature). A third idea is that we become reliant upon the machines, ceding ownership of the means of production from humans (capitalists and workers) to AI. That's most related to the idea of basic income, running with the idea that the government should tax the results of robotic labor to pay for people to have a means of surviving and seeing to it that even the government itself is automated. I didn't have to come up with much; I just had to work out the name and figure out how to make sure all these previous ideas could fit under it. The closest thing to an actual new theory of social/economic organization that I came up with is "AI/robots own the means of production". That is, once we create AGI, said AGI should run society. But that's just an extrapolation of basic income. I can understand why some might not think this isn't very radical— if you're of the mind that there's a binary organization of society (private property is allowed or private property is abolished) then no, this doesn't do anything new. Yuli Ban fucked around with this message at 19:52 on Mar 30, 2017 |
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2017 19:39
|
|
|
lollontee posted:That's not an idea you moron. That doesn't get us anywhere, that doesn't inform anyone on anything. It's loving worthless. If all you have to say is "hurrr i think people should own the stuff" and that's loving it, you don't get to smugly quote your own reddit links when somebody points that out. Hope. That. Helps. Apologies to my assholish behavior on the last page.
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2017 19:48
|
|
|
Yuli Ban posted:Well you're the one asking a question that was answered in the OP. Okay, you've made up a new word that describes "automation-related social problems". Now what? What useful discussion is there to be had about "hey guys I invented a word"?
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2017 19:51
|
|
|
Robots can't own things.
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2017 19:51
|
|
|
Main Paineframe posted:Now what? What useful discussion is there to be had about "hey guys I invented a word"? Hence why I said the discussion in this thread is redundant and we can return to the other automation thread. OwlFancier posted:Robots can't own things. This whole idea requires the belief that AGI/ASI is possible. If you don't believe it's possible, then this whole thread's been a waste of your time.
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2017 19:53
|
|
|
OwlFancier posted:Robots can't own things. tbf once they are sentient and stuff they can
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2017 19:56
|
|
|
I'm not sure you invented the idea of robot overlords.Typo posted:tbf once they are sentient and stuff they can Sapience is not, historically, a guarantee of being allowed to own things.
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2017 19:56
|
|
|
OwlFancier posted:Sapience is not, historically, a guarantee of being allowed to own things. It is however a winning combination for a slave uprising.
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2017 19:59
|
|
|
OwlFancier posted:I'm not sure you invented the idea of robot overlords. yeah but it's only a matter of time until the scotus defines them as persons and they can run for president and poo poo
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2017 19:59
|
|
|
I don't think I want to see what a machine intelligence would produce as an election-winning vehicle.
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2017 20:02
|
|
|
Yuli Ban posted:This whole idea requires the belief that AGI/ASI is possible. If you don't believe it's possible, then this whole thread's been a waste of your time. Artificial intelligence with its own will/personhood is so far off technologically that it doesn't really make sense to come up with ideas that assume its existence. Also, and I could be wrong about this, but I don't see any reason why the people who create artificial intelligence intended to accomplish a particular task (for example a robot in a factory) could simply not give such AI any sort of person-hood, so the capitalists who own the factories, etc would still have the power.
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2017 20:13
|
|
|
OwlFancier posted:I don't think I want to see what a machine intelligence would produce as an election-winning vehicle. maybe we'll have turing locks codified into law to prevent them from ever getting advanced enough to pass a turing test
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2017 20:31
|
|
|
this is less eripsa and more toblerone triangular and congrats, you replaced capitalists who employ people with capitalists who own capital that can produce unmixed with labor. hopefully their wealth trickles down to everyone else somehow!
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2017 20:35
|
|
|
OwlFancier posted:I don't think I want to see what a machine intelligence would produce as an election-winning vehicle. What would Bernie Sanders do if aided by a neurally integrated AI https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zQkyhrZHT0k
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2017 02:27
|
|
|
op how do you feel about anarchism and/or socialism
Venomous fucked around with this message at 02:38 on Apr 1, 2017 |
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2017 02:34
|
|
|
Anyone got tobleronetriangle.gif?
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2017 02:47
|
|
|
Venomous posted:op how do you feel about anarchism and/or socialism Depends. What kind of socialism and anarchism? I already identify as a market socialist and have warmed up to the idea of a rekindled Project Cybersyn. But things like anarcho-primitivism are instant turn-offs. Yuli Ban fucked around with this message at 04:38 on Apr 1, 2017 |
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2017 04:32
|
|
|
Yuli Ban posted:And considering that the three subreddits collectively have about 1,500 subscribers, I'd say I'm probably more successful than whatever the gently caress Eripsa (who?) ever was. 1500 subs is impressive. But how many chatbots have you enlightened? 
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2017 15:57
|
|
|
Ytlaya posted:More generally speaking, I wish that people like the OP or Eripsa would just accept that they don't really have what it takes to come up with monumental political/economic/philosophical theories, and that's okay. Neither do I! It just seems like, for some people, the idea of coming up with a Big Idea is so appealing that they feel the need to keep trying. Ytlaya, you're right to suggest that people ought to understand and accept their limitations. But you're entirely wrong to think that your limitations apply to everyone. Not everyone is as normal as you. A million abnormal monkeys banging at keyboards will eventually churn out a good idea, and even if 99.999% of them only produce garbage that's no reason to discourage any of them from banging at keys. Since the close of the previous thread I've been developing Polytopolis for the Global Challenges Prize. Some Swedish billionaire (who appears to be frustrated with the UN) is giving out 5 million bucks to someone with an innovative model of global governance. The submissions opened today and don't close until September, and I've been taking the contest seriously. I've completed my introductory slide show, and I've been working on recording a walk through lecture of the idea. If you remember the old thread, slides 17, 20, and 22 lay out the technical implementation details.  I legit think I have a shot at this challenge. I won't be surprised if I lose, but I can smell it. I was recently contacted out of the blue by Susanne Templehof, the founder of BitNation. She actually had a submission solicited by the Global Challenges Foundation for their 2016 report. It was the only "technical" proposal in a report mostly filled with geopolitical policy. Again, they solicited from her last year, and she had no idea they'd be doing a prize this year. Just this week I had a skype call with Susanne asking if I'd want to collaborate on her entry for this year's prize, to supply the identity framework for her bitnation reputation system. I swear to loving baphomet this is not an april fools joke. My experience with Synereo has soured me on blockchain anything, but I'm a fan of pirate party ethos, and her contacts and existing reputation make the offer quite tempting. I am still not sure what I plan to do. But I'm taking this all as indication that I'm within shouting distance of that prize. I don't think I'm stupid for believing I have a real shot, and putting absurd amounts of effort into that belief. Most monkeys produce garbage, but every single success was also produced by a dedicated monkey, banging at the keys. And hindsight is the only way to definitively tell the two apart. So Yuli Ban. I'm down with Fully Automated Luxury Queer Space Anarcho-Collectivism (aka FALKSAC). I've been thinking this poo poo out for over a decade, with the reg date and track record of public failures to prove it. I don't have 1500 subs, but the activist tech community and the anarcho-left know who I am, and I'm in the middle of building a legit digital governing framework. You want to talk? Let's talk. Eripsa fucked around with this message at 16:54 on Apr 1, 2017 |
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2017 16:47
|
|
|
yesssssssssssssssssssssssssss
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2017 17:13
|
|
|
Eripsa posted:You want to talk? Let's talk. Would you accept a moderator post on these subreddits?
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2017 19:13
|
|
|
Nerds IBM watson is now part of my MDM software, it is seizing the means of management, if it goes after the capital holders i fear we are not long for this philosophy 
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2017 19:39
|
|
|
Yuli Ban posted:Would you accept a moderator post on these subreddits? I don't need a special title. I submitted my FALQSAC essay to the Technism thread, and I'm happy to engage whomstever bites. I wonder if you might comment on your views concerning the role of blockchain-like decentralized technologies play in a technocracy on your view? Nearly everyone who isn't a legitimate technocrat is attempting to become one by using blockchain-based services. How keen are you on jumping on that boat? VV This is good advice, and to be clear it is not my intention to make this thread about me and my timecube. I mostly just appreciate the contrast between the hobbyist Ideas Guy and a pro like myself. Eripsa fucked around with this message at 20:16 on Apr 1, 2017 |
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2017 19:49
|
|
|
Before any other regulars chime in, I'd like to repeat something I proposed back in the Polytopolis thread: some of us have danced this dance with Eripsa more than once and it usually follows the same steps. As such, I suggest we refrain from debating for at least five pages or so and let people who haven't dealt with his ideas before have a crack at it, and see where things go. I hypothesize that we will see a similar thread progression, which will lend evidence that it's the substance* of what he posts that makes these threads turn out the way they do, not some cadre of jackals who intentionally misread/misunderstand him. Also, sorry Yuli Ban but your thread is about to spin completely out of your control. If it's any consolation, you didn't really have much worth talking about to begin with. Captain_Maclaine fucked around with this message at 20:22 on Apr 1, 2017 |
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2017 20:11
|
|
|
Eripsa posted:VV This is good advice, and to be clear it is not my intention to make this thread about me and my timecube. I mostly just appreciate the contrast between the hobbyist Ideas Guy and a pro like myself. i genuinely hope this thread turns into your timecube but for a whole new group of posters
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2017 20:20
|
|
|
Captain_Maclaine posted:If it's any consolation, you didn't really have much worth talking about to begin with. All technism is supposed to be is a catch-all term for those supporting increased automation in society, with a few variants that can basically be summed up as techno-market socialism and techno-Marxism. That it's gone for 4 pages is a tad disconcerting. And frankly, I don't want to see where it could go from here.
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2017 23:32
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 19, 2024 07:38 |
|
|
That makes about as much sense as saying you support gravity.
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2017 23:34
|
|