Click HERE to see this thread with all of the graphics, features, and links.

It is more plausible and efficient than the whole global economy.

And you're not taking it seriously! Seriously?

The best way I can describe TVP (The Venus Project), is the city 01 from the Animatrix's "The Second Renaissance Part II" bit.

It was separated, ostracized from the humans who liked to put AI to work as slaves, when it turned out they were just plain better and what a waste of the amazing technological liberating potential of these "slaves".

So they left, and created 01. 01's technologically superior productivity and sales overseas to us stupid humans saw it take over the world, 01 overcame all human nations in GDP overnight.

Humans got all jealous and pissed off, and instead of going with the change, they decided to star a nuclear war, and all they did was halt so much good that could have been.

Jacque isn't a joke, what he is talking about is very similar, except the slaves aren't AI, they're the majority of humans slaving under the big dollar bill - and the small portion of us who benefit from the chaos of free-enterprise are the jealous incompetent humans making things worse each and every day they don't replace GM with flying cars.

We could have started the Venus project, pragmatically I might add, FIFTY, I say 50 years ago. America had planned on making Super Particle Acceleraters and transcontinental, subterranean vac train 700 mph systems that could have changed the world back in the 1960s.

Noppe.

Anyway I'm referring to Symmetric Chaos and his past musings about Jacque Fresco. SM probably didn't know about Jacque Fresco, yet he was one of many people I brought up in another thread who SM blindly said were morons full of bs.

You're gonna need to elaborate, SM. I believe Oliver North and a few other members here have the same position as SM.

You might as well have just named ON and Sym by name in the title and used this as your OP:

http://24.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_malcleIphN1r7e9d9o1_500.jpg

The list would have included you and a few others.

And this isn't about anybody in particular, it's about technocracy (not neo-democracy like Greece) being pushed into the dark.

Originally posted by Dolos
The list would have included you and a few others.

And this isn't about anybody in particular, it's about technocracy (not neo-democracy like Greece) being pushed into the dark.
No, it's about calling people out because they disagree with you.

I'm not even sure they or you would disagree with me if you gave my sources the light of day.

This thread is complicated, I don't know what it's about.

LniuUT0XSYo

Originally posted by soopercavell
This thread is complicated, I don't know what it's about.

https://fbcdn-sphotos-h-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-ash4/379579_677147948967239_798506805_n.jpg

Originally posted by Dolos
The list would have included you and a few others.

And this isn't about anybody in particular, it's about technocracy (not neo-democracy like Greece) being pushed into the dark.

Me, too? Would it be me? Oh I hope so, I hope so very much.


One of the problem with the Venus Project, or more specifically its adherents, is how they gloss over almost all real life problems their ideas have with "technology will solve it". And that is naive. There are huge changes going to happen because of technology, but we should look at it in a real context, not a childish and utopian lens.

Originally posted by Bardock42
There are huge changes going to happen because of technology, but we should look at it in a real context, not a childish and utopian lens.

You don't know what you are talking about.

This part of your quote is pure ignorance of everything I've written in this thread.

We are at a point, technologically, where money and labor + managerial jobs could be made obsolete along with business and politics all-together.

The only human jobs would be the design-phase.

Originally posted by Dolos
You don't know what you are talking about.

This part of your quote is pure ignorance of everything I've written in this thread.

Fair enough, your argumentation and the breadth of evidence you presented convinced me, I concede.

You are too skeptical.

We lack the facts here, you lack the agricultural understanding even if we had the sketches.

I'm just saying, maybe it is that 'out there'. I mean, what if it is?

I think that's the very problem since we had the technology, we cannot organize it as a nation, only as small groups such as Jacque's. This community will eventually build a city, if it works, it could build funding.

This could change the world. What we're looking at here, might not be a joke. It could end up being the precursor to the first global civilization.

This is the first I've heard of the Venus Project, my first thought was of the Mars Society due to the similar name, but this sounds even less realistic than that.

Have you heard of the Reddit Island project, Dolos?

We are not anywhere close to that point. What in the world makes you think we are? Who is going to manufacture all the iPhones, clothes, chairs we need? Who's going to mine the resources? It's not going to be robots, cause we don't have any that can do it yet. Robots can be very useful, but generally it has to be with human supervision or aiding the human doing something. Foxconn would love to throw out all its workers and exchange them with machines, but they can't. Self driving cars are on the horizon, but the foremost experts on them have a goal of 20 years in the future.

We are not at a point where we can do this, and when we'll ever be.


The world may very well change as this actually becomes more feasible, but it's not going to be the Venus Project changing it.

Originally posted by Omega Vision
...this sounds...realistic...

It 'sounds' unrealistic?

Do tell.

Originally posted by Dolos
It 'sounds' unrealistic?

Do tell.
Are you trying some postmodernist debate tactic here?

Originally posted by Bardock42
We are not anywhere close to that point. What in the world makes you think we are? Who is going to manufacture all the iPhones, clothes, chairs we need? Who's going to mine the resources?

Autonomous systems, controlled by cybernated networks, monitoring and accounting for the sufficient resources.



I'm not convinced.



Wouldn't be so sure about that. We have nano-processors, on the brink of quantum computers.

As for developing these systems, yes, people will be making them. Design-phase jobs will be the only human jobs, probably 4 days a week, for 4 hours a day. The rest of the day we can go chill.



What?

I think small groups of people making functional systems, or cities like these are a good start.

Originally posted by Omega Vision
Are you trying some postmodernist debate tactic here?

What's so unrealistic about that kind of technology?

Originally posted by Omega Vision
Are you trying some postmodernist debate tactic here?

Do Wilhelm Tell!



(Weimarer Klassik debate tactic)

Originally posted by Bardock42
Do Wilhelm Tell!



(Weimarer Klassik debate tactic)

Pretty much.

Pretty far from postmodernist debating. That would be, minus , written in coded matrices.

Originally posted by Dolos
Autonomous systems, controlled by cybernated networks, monitoring and accounting for the sufficient resources.

Wizard did it.

Originally posted by Dolos

I'm not convinced.


Where are they? Why are they not used? Who is hiding them from us?



Wouldn't be so sure about that. We have nano-processors, on the brink of quantum computers.

Originally posted by Dolos

As for developing these systems, yes, people will be making them. Design-phase jobs will be the only human jobs, probably 4 days a week, for 4 hours a day. The rest of the day we can go chill.

But this is not based on anything resembling fact. This is just something you said. There's nothing to indicate this.

And what do Quantum Computer have to do with anything?


Originally posted by Dolos

What?

I think small groups of people making functional systems, or cities like these are a good start.

As far as I know there isn't a functional city like that though (cause it doesn't work).

Originally posted by Dolos
What's so unrealistic about that kind of technology?
If you must ask, what's unrealistic about it is that at the moment it's mostly theory.

But I didn't say it was unrealistic. You did. I said it was less realistic than the aspirations of the Mars Society. Intentionally misquoting people is one of the most annoying things you can do in a forum debate.

I sound like a repeat of this video:

mX6Y0D8WACA

I am glad I got this debate going, though.

Originally posted by Omega Vision
If you must ask, what's unrealistic about it is that at the moment it's mostly theory.

But I didn't say it was unrealistic. You did. I said it was less realistic than the aspirations of the Mars Society. Intentionally misquoting people is one of the most annoying things you can do in a forum debate.

The Mars society is a space colony that would most likely receive far more resources and be far more likely to succeed in and from a global cybernated technocracy than it is now.

pNOiJSdrq9k

Originally posted by Dolos
The Mars society is a space colony that would most likely receive far more resources and be far more likely to succeed in and from a global cybernated technocracy than it is now.

pNOiJSdrq9k
yes, but that's sort of like saying "In a world with magic we'd have a better chance of taming dragons"

Before you say anything, I do believe that manned missions to Mars are in the near future, and permanent settlement may even happen in my lifetime (I hope it does), but actually terraforming Mars so that it becomes as fertile as Earth, which last I checked is what the Mars Society aims for, is centuries off, if it's possible at all. If I live to be a hundred the best I can see is that Mars is like Antartica is now: not too hard to reach, with some permanent scientific bases, but no large-scale habitats.

Look at how much the world has changed in the last 100 years compared to the 100 years before that?

How can you be so pessimistic about the Venus Project?

It's cool you're looking up things like the Mars Society, though.

Originally posted by Omega Vision
I
But I didn't say it was unrealistic. You did. I said it was less realistic than the aspirations of the Mars Society. Intentionally misquoting people is one of the most annoying things you can do in a forum debate.

Intentionally misquoting people is much more annoying in non-written debates, as you can't go back and check.

does the OP really use the Animatrix as part of a question about why their ideas aren't taken seriously?

Originally posted by Bardock42
Wizard did it.



Where are they? Why are they not used? Who is hiding them from us?

From what I've read, we've had the technology for quite some time.

No one is hiding it, and the only reason it's not being used is because of the free-enterprise system. Money is so bad that's it's devolving human civilization.

The Venus Project plans to have a working city by 2050 onward.

Originally posted by Oliver North
does the OP really use the Animatrix as part of a question about why their ideas aren't taken seriously?

No, I used it as a comparison, to help explain myself in any way I could.

I think I've explained it better and more realistically in the posts afterward, don't you?

Originally posted by Dolos
Look at how much the world has changed in the last 100 years compared to the 100 years before that?

How can you be so pessimistic about the Venus Project?

It's cool you're looking up things like the Mars Society, though.
I'm not pessimistic, I'm just not going to lie to myself and pretend that technology is more advanced than it is or that little groups with utopian aspirations can ever change the world when all other such projects have been failures.

When it comes to scifi cybernetics and the like bores me. It's all about lasers, hyperdrives, planoforming, and somehow making sword-fighting militarily relevant again.

Originally posted by Dolos
No, I used it as a comparison, to help explain myself in any way I could.

I think I've explained it better and more realistically in the posts afterward, don't you?

sure

and a more serious answer would sound like the answers I've given you on a lot of other topics. Even if I thought TVP were desirable or plausible or beneficial (which I don't), the transition and implementation of such a system would create such immense problems. Again, what does TVP do about the Arab-Israeli conflict? Does Israel, a Western ally, get the technology and the ability to use it as a form of subjugation over the Palestinians? Because that is the most likely scenario....

Originally posted by Omega Vision
I'm not pessimistic, I'm just not going to lie to myself and pretend that technology is more advanced than it is or that little groups with utopian aspirations can ever change the world when all other such projects have been failures.

When it comes to scifi cybernetics and the like bores me. It's all about lasers, hyperdrives, planoforming, and somehow making sword-fighting militarily relevant again.

I'd like to see your face if you saw conclusive evidence that our computers are advanced enough, our robotics and factories complex enough to do it all without us...if we'd but build the damn system.

Originally posted by Oliver North
sure

and a more serious answer would sound like the answers I've given you on a lot of other topics. Even if I thought TVP were desirable or plausible or beneficial (which I don't), the transition and implementation of such a system would create such immense problems. Again, what does TVP do about the Arab-Israeli conflict? Does Israel, a Western ally, get the technology and the ability to use it as a form of subjugation over the Palestinians? Because that is the most likely scenario....

If the Israelites could set it up that way...but they'd be less likely than leaving it to a Cybernated Government because there'd be no one for the design-phase careers to keep the system up to date and maintained.

Why don't you think the system itself is plausible?

Originally posted by Dolos
I'd like to see your face if you saw conclusive evidence that our computers are advanced enough, our robotics and factories complex enough to do it all without us...if we'd but build the damn system.
I would love to see my face too. Too bad neither of us will.

Originally posted by Omega Vision
I would love to see my face too. Too bad neither of us will.

That's cause you're not looking, and I don't know where to look.

I'm saying, you don't know whether we have that kind of capability, just because we aren't doing it.

In the future they may have a working city.

Originally posted by Dolos
If the Israelites could set it up that way...but they'd be less likely than leaving it to a Cybernated Government because there'd be no one for the design-phase careers to keep the system up to date and maintained.

ya, the Israeli's have one of the most theocratic wings to their government on the planet, they aren't going to be leaving major military decisions up to a computer any time soon.

Originally posted by Dolos
Why don't you think the system itself is plausible?

a mixture of basic human psychology and the fact that there have never been any successful large societies that have been organized from the top down like that. People are too varied in large numbers for the type of organization necessary.

Originally posted by Oliver North
ya, the Israeli's have one of the most theocratic wings to their government on the planet, they aren't going to be leaving major military decisions up to a computer any time soon.

Than their system will be fundamentally flawed.



But a group...

"Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful, committed people can change the world. Indeed, it's the only thing that ever has."

Originally posted by Dolos
Than their system will be fundamentally flawed.

so you get my point then, right? the real world implementation of things like TVP will be imperfect in ways that exacerbate already existing divisions in society, and we would be much better off looking to fix those issues rather than looking for sci fi tech?

Originally posted by Dolos
But a group...

"Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful, committed people can change the world. Indeed, it's the only thing that ever has."

that has nothing to do with my point...

yes, the small group of people who ran the soviet union were able to change the world. they were, however, unsuccessful in organizing an economy in a top down way, and their utopian ideals proved more harmful than beneficial and entirely undesirable.

Originally posted by Oliver North
so you get my point then, right? the real world implementation of things like TVP will be imperfect in ways that exacerbate already existing divisions in society, and we would be much better off looking to fix those issues rather than looking for sci fi tech?

What if there is no fix to the human condition?

This is where my posthumanism stance emerges.

I don't think humans should run other humans.



This isn't the Soviet Union. You can't just say it won't work just because totally different systems in the past have failed.

Originally posted by Dolos
What if there is no fix to the human condition?

you just criticized OV and Bardock for being pessimists...

also, my choice wouldn't be to make things more unequal and increase suffering

Originally posted by Dolos
This is where my posthumanism stance emerges.

because technology = magic

Originally posted by Dolos
I don't think humans should run other humans.

no, you think an even less accountable, omnipotent AI should

Originally posted by Dolos
This isn't the Soviet Union. You can't just say it won't work just because totally different systems in the past have failed.

even the smallest of human endeavors are ruined with too much micromanagement, and TVP requires more top down micromanaging than North Korea

The setup is more hypercritical. The "autonomous systems, controlled by cybernated networks, monitoring and accounting for the sufficient resources" is not an omnipotent AI or even an emotional intelligence.

After it's setup, it's supposed to lessen micromanagement, to, well, nothing. To make it unnecessary.

the AI would be the micromanager, a situation arguably worse than humans being a micromanager...

Originally posted by Oliver North
the AI would be the micromanager, a situation arguably worse than humans being a micromanager...

Why are you paranoid of a billion nanoporccessors and quantum computers, without self-consciousness beyond knowing that it is the thing processing, processing information. This much iron we have, so it's available for the autonomous systems to produce this many iron products, so this many people can have said product.

A true causal AI comes into being when we use technology to transform ourselves into a truly self-aware thinking machine, a sentient mind superior to any quantum computer still. When we allow microscopic technology to replace what we're made of.

I would support the right to make mistakes over being directed by a Super-AI.

Originally posted by Dolos
Why are you paranoid of a billion nanoporccessors and quantum computers, without self-consciousness beyond knowing that it is the thing processing, processing information - in this case how best to keep production going?

A true causal AI comes into being when we use technology to transform ourselves into a truly self-aware thinking machine, a sentient mind superior to any quantum computer still. When we allow microscopic technology to replace what we're made of.

because my opposition to fascism has nothing to do with how smart the dictator is

Originally posted by Omega Vision
I would support the right to make mistakes over being directed by a Super-AI.

It's not directing people, it's directing the things that makes people homes, etc. Humans are designing everything, everything functions according to their designs, and there is no hierarchy at all.

Originally posted by Oliver North
because my opposition to fascism has nothing to do with how smart the dictator is

Dictator?

It dictates whether or not everyone can have a nice car, as opposed to money dictating it. It determines the standard of living based on what is available.

There is no law enforcement, there is automated defense systems, including drones that can keep everyone safe in case someone tries to use their fork as a weapon. The person is treated, the criminal is isolated until medical and psychologist HUMAN specialists can determine how best to correct or facilitate the criminal.

Originally posted by Dolos
Dictator?

the AI that tries to micromanage a top down economy

Originally posted by Dolos
It dictates whether or not everyone can have a nice car, as opposed to money dictating it. It determines the standard of living based on what is available.

i know, Dolos

Originally posted by Dolos
It's not directing people, it's directing the things that makes people homes, etc. Humans are designing everything, everything functions according to their designs, and there is no hierarchy at all.
What if people want to make their own things without the AI's involvement?

I'm afraid they can't let you do that, Dave.




It was that or Logan's Run, not sure I picked correctly.

Originally posted by Omega Vision
What if people want to make their own things without the AI's involvement?

Policies on what designs you can and can't have built would be discussed with an ethics committee. For instance, personal firearms would be unnecessary and you'd not get very far.

That's not hierarchy in the sense of laborer to chief officer. Nor in the sense of congressman or politician. There is no monetary incentive, therefore people will behave very differently, much more civilized.

This wouldn't be possible without this cybernated resource-based economy.

Money has a way of complicating politics, and ruining lives.

Originally posted by Dolos
Policies on what designs you can and can't have built would be discussed with an ethics committee. For instance, personal firearms would be unnecessary and you'd not get very far.

That's not hierarchy in the sense of laborer to chief officer. Nor in the sense of congressman or politician. There is no monetary incentive, therefore people will behave very differently, much more civilized.

This wouldn't be possible without this cybernated resource-based economy.

Money has a way of complicating politics, and ruining lives.

What if the ethics committee is corrupt? Or has some genocidal leanings? How is the ethics committee selected? How is it checked?

Money in politics is an issue, but it's not the issue alone, people can be terrible without monetary incentives.

Originally posted by Bardock42
What if the ethics committee is corrupt? Or has some genocidal leanings? How is the ethics committee selected? How is it checked?

Money in politics is an issue, but it's not the issue alone, people can be terrible without monetary incentives.

You're being silly.

How is it selected and checked? I'd guess as multi-culturally and accepting as possible. With a new wave of reason, and an emphasis on learning for our younger generations and on developing the sciences. Without money, free and independent thought are also more valued.

The biggest change comes from the removal of unethical, or menial jobs. Removal of socio-economic classes, everyone is on the same page, freed from so many stressers, freed from inequality, all able to enjoy the same living standard. Of course people will still find a way to be jealous or envious, but we'd be a billion times better. We'd have more free time than we'd know what to do with, our interests would turn to the stars, to colonizing other worlds, to creating great works of art and beautiful city-scapes. Designing new sports, etc.

As a technoprogressive society, we'd allow genetic engineering and Ray-tech to delete cancer cells or redesign dna after having mapped the human genome. A cure for cancer, lost limbs, and all birth defects waiting to be found and implemented.

A Utopia.

Originally posted by Dolos
You're being silly.


Am I though? Or are you perhaps hand waving genuine problems as being "silly" or taken care of by "cybernated AI wizard"?

Originally posted by Bardock42
Am I though? Or are you perhaps hand waving genuine problems as being "silly" or taken care of by "cybernated AI wizard"?

You're being silly.

Originally posted by Dolos
"Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful, committed people can change the world. Indeed, it's the only thing that ever has."

The success rate for changing the world is pretty low.

Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
The success rate for changing the world is pretty low.

What are you talking about? 100% of groups that changed the world were successful...

Originally posted by Bardock42
What are you talking about? 100% of groups that changed the world were successful...

By virtue of changing the world. lol.

I'm not saying that there's a 100% certainty the working city will be built. Who am I to do so?

Originally posted by Dolos
By virtue of changing the world. lol.

I'm not saying that there's a 100% certainty the working city will be built. Who am I to do so?
I would say it's closer to 0%

Originally posted by Omega Vision
I would say it's closer to 0%

I don't think you qualify as an accurate predictor of these odds, not by a mile.

Originally posted by Dolos
I don't think you qualify as an accurate predictor of these odds, not by a mile.
That makes two of us.

Now, I'm gonna go out on a limb here, and say it's probably between the two percentages.

I saw off that limb. You break both of your legs. I win.

Quick, Bardock,do a saving throw!

Originally posted by Lord Lucien
Quick, Bardock,do a saving throw!

It's a 1!




Thats good, right?