Originally posted by inimalist
I didn't realize that posting your opinion on an internet discussion forum meant that you didn't want people to comment on your thoughtsgibberish
also, doesn't address how family=freedom.
my point: Oil is essential because it is what our infrastructure and technology run on
your point: oil isn't essential because there are other options possible in the future
my point: the future isn't now. Right now oil is necessary.
your point: look at this stuff that isn't ready right now.
do you see where you are missing what I'm saying? I've never said anything against alternative fuels. Oil is necessary because the alternatives do not exist today to replace it. They might some day, and then oil wouldn't be necessary, but now it is. Its really easy.
ironic in the extreme. Har Har!
oh right, so I should open my mind to the point where my brains fall out
I'm sorry sir, but if you think there is an affordable and mature fuel source that could, if the political will existed, be immediately adopted to completely eliminate our dependence on oil, you have drank some terrible kool-aide.
The technological advances that could put solar there are likely to happen in 5-10 years. That doesn't even begin to deal with the logistics of changing the entire infrastructure of the developed world.
I am aware of such groups, and they offer a glimpse of what might be possible for humanity.
Unfortunately, they don't have to worry about cities full of millions of people who don't necessarily share their world view.
100 like minded communists, anarchists, fascists, or whatever will be able to make any community work. At large numbers it becomes difficult. It is also a little glib to call them independent communities, or to use them as an example of non-monetary economies, as they live and exist within the normal economy.
our money would be better spent looking into Lalzenthorpes 6th book of arcane majiks, as there are conjurations which propose the divination from one substance into pure majikal substance
or alchemy, where we may discover how to turn any substance into another through laws of mystic force
It is so cynical of you to say "oh well, I don't have to make an argument, science will do it for me". Obnoxious even
jibber jabber
One word to disprove everything you just said. Denmark.
100% energy independent and almost 100% oil independent, i guess they still need some to use for the doors..
AND they have more than 100 people.
Unconditional love in family=freedom
friendliness becomes unconditional love
by promoting friendliness i.e. smiling
you are promoting joy. family. freedom.
Yes the options are now, the exist right now, refer to Denmark (the greatest nation in the world) oil isn't essential did you not read my point on getting a GAS conversion?
You obviously haven't done your research, as solar is now 40% efficient which is more than enough for today's power needs, and even though solargrass is only 1% efficient and still being developed, but say if you covered.. say a building in it (and yes it is see though) then you could dramatically cut it's power costs by its sheer quantity.
And for your information, there are more than 100 people in Australia, and we're one of the less racist, sexist, and all the other ists out there. Hurray for multiculturalism!! AND 99% of Aussies don't have guns, because we can reason with our minds instead of fear.
Criticise me =)
and then hav fun =D
Originally posted by inimalist
another bad example (I guess it was XYZ who used diamonds)many of these "self checkouts" are being removed from stores in my town for several reasons. They are temperamental, are VERY easy to steal from, and often take far longer than a trained individual to ring through. (not to mention that these checkouts require a cashier to watch them, and potentially several to deal with individual problems).
Also, there are MANY people who feed their kids from the pay they get ringing in a till. In a world before the elimination of capital, are we to suppose the working class will have no way to earn money as robots are implemented?
I agree that technology will replace certain jobs and provide services, I think you just pointed to one that isn't working well. Its like electronic voting. Tech is cool and all, there are just some things that appear to work best with human interaction.
(Actually, to extend the metaphore, electronic tills support, at least in this view, technocracy. Implementing technology OR policy changes to make things work properly. Rather than depending on technology to solve problems, working on making things more efficent can be better than technological solutions. lol, or maybe I'm just trying to usurp pragmatism).
Its not really a bad example, because you pointed out the flaw in your own argument, money. Why do people steal? Cuz they're greedy, why are they greedy, because the don't have what they need and we live in a society fueled by consumerism, eating 3 'big macs' is DISGUSTING and people need to learn self control, instead of saying something is impossible or wrong, tell me, what is your most positive goal for humanity?
Originally posted by Windswept7
One word to disprove everything you just said. Denmark.
100% energy independent and almost 100% oil independent, i guess they still need some to use for the doors..
AND they have more than 100 people.
oil independence does not mean that oil isn't needed.
Denmark still drills lots of oil
hit me with some real stats about the % of alternative energy that Denmark uses for its power supply.
Originally posted by Windswept7
Unconditional love in family=freedom
friendliness becomes unconditional love
by promoting friendliness i.e. smiling
you are promoting joy. family. freedom.
that is ridiculous. Freedom has nothing to do with happiness. Nor the family.
Originally posted by Windswept7
Yes the options are now, the exist right now, refer to Denmark (the greatest nation in the world) oil isn't essential did you not read my point on getting a GAS conversion?
lol.
Originally posted by Windswept7
You obviously haven't done your research, as solar is now 40% efficient which is more than enough for today's power needs, and even though solargrass is only 1% efficient and still being developed, but say if you covered.. say a building in it (and yes it is see though) then you could dramatically cut it's power costs by its sheer quantity.
if solar is at 40% (why not cite something?) it is in labs only. Last I heard was mid 20s. However, like many other technologies, it is not the fact that we can or can't do things, but in actually doing it.
I asked earlier if XYZ thought that, if oil were completely unavailable tomorrow, the world would be able to exist as it does today.
Well, windswept7, if all of the oil on the planet were gone tomorrow, what do you think would happen to Denmark? Do you think it would go on being strong, or do you think the civilization would collapse much like every other western nation?
Please don't forget, I'm not saying oil is good.
Originally posted by Windswept7
And for your information, there are more than 100 people in Australia, and we're one of the less racist, sexist, and all the other ists out there. Hurray for multiculturalism!! AND 99% of Aussies don't have guns, because we can reason with our minds instead of fear.
schizophasia
totally unrelated to anything we are discussing, and to be frank, Australia has nothing on Canada.
Originally posted by Windswept7
Criticise me =)
and then hav fun =D
I'm actually not criticizing you, I'm criticizing what you believe
Originally posted by Windswept7
Its not really a bad example, because you pointed out the flaw in your own argument,
you asked me what my argument was below, yet claim my example goes against it?
that doesn't make sense 😉
the example works because it shows that the answers to the problems we face today are not necessarily best answered by techno-fetishism.
Originally posted by Windswept7
money. Why do people steal? Cuz they're greedy, why are they greedy, because the don't have what they need and we live in a society fueled by consumerism, eating 3 'big macs' is DISGUSTING and people need to learn self control, instead of saying something is impossible or wrong,
do you believe in evolution?
Originally posted by Windswept7
tell me, what is your most positive goal for humanity?
individual freedom
Given this thread seems doomed for obscurity at some point, there is an addendum I'd like to make.
It appears 40% efficiency in solar collectors is possible. In fact, given some recent breakthroughs in the ability to focus light onto photon receptors, the shape of the receptors, and the wavelengths they are able to capture, solar power is quickly becoming a cost effective alternative to fossil fuels. Potentially all of these breakthroughs could have an additive effect on solar technology, making it exponentially more efficient.
This isn't a conceit of any point, as there still exists no distributer of these uber-panels, oil is still cheaper, and there is no solar infrastructure (though the environmental impact of large scale solar power-plants are being investigated). Also, these breakthroughs are lab only, and there is no definitive reason to think they aren't mutually exclusive to one another.
Amazing news, however, I think if it is looked at with some degree of skepticism, my estimate of 5-10 years before solar power becomes viable seems to be supported, rather than the idea that we could immediately switch to full solar power.
If we harnessed the power from the sun at noon exactly, we'd have enough to power the world.
But it doesn't matter, geothermal is way better and is easily used. We can use 200ZJ right now, that's enough to power the world for 400 years.
But because we live in a monetary system and this abundance doesn't produce profit, no one does it. we don't do it because we're told we need money to live, which is a lie.
Originally posted by lord xyz
If we harnessed the power from the sun at noon exactly, we'd have enough to power the world.
"harnessed the power of the sun" - what?
Originally posted by lord xyz
But it doesn't matter, geothermal is way better and is easily used. We can use 200ZJ right now, that's enough to power the world for 400 years.
where can we use 200ZJ of geothermal power?
see any point I have made about infrastructure. in a system with infinite power, lack of infrastructure makes it scarce.
Originally posted by lord xyz
But because we live in a monetary system and this abundance doesn't produce profit, no one does it. we don't do it because we're told we need money to live, which is a lie.
indeed, forced labour, directed by some top-down mechanism, would be more able to do things, which the "all-knowing and all-wise" leaders determine they need to do (for the good of man kind of course) than free people. Unfortunate, that
Originally posted by inimalistNot the best word, I guess.
"harnessed the power of the sun" - what?where can we use 200ZJ of geothermal power?
see any point I have made about infrastructure. in a system with infinite power, lack of infrastructure makes it scarce.
indeed, forced labour, directed by some top-down mechanism, would be more able to do things, which the "all-knowing and all-wise" leaders determine they need to do (for the good of man kind of course) than free people. Unfortunate, that
We have the infrastructure for this energy. Hence we CAN use it right now.
I don't know. The Venus Project hasn't been tried, so it's unfair to say it won't work.
Originally posted by lord xyz
Not the best word, I guess.We have the infrastructure for this energy. Hence we CAN use it right now.
the MIT paper that you are quoting actually states that with $1b (AMD) investment, over 15 years the technology would be good enough to garner 200ZJ (http://www.homebuilding.co.uk/feature/geothermal-energy-heating-revolution)
also, much like solar power, having the ability to get the power is much different than supplying the power to anyone. There is no power plant in the world capable of producing 200ZJ of geothermal power. You are correct, once those plants are up and running they can probably use the existing power grid, they just aren't up and running.
Originally posted by lord xyz
I don't know. The Venus Project hasn't been tried, so it's unfair to say it won't work.
See, I think it could work. And I'll even give you (though I don't agree) that there are individuals who could efficiently run such a system without corruption.
My problem with it at this point is that it is feudalism, only assuming that the leaders are nice to the people. People don't have choices. Someone has to organize what scientists/engineers/labourers do.
Like, I personally want to some day research the neuroscience of beliefs. However, in your system, it appears that there would be an organizational body that would assume my time would be better spent researching something more applied, and all of a sudden I HAVE to research, say child development, because that is what has been determined to be better for humanity.
This is based entirely off of what you posted. TVP says that they want to redirect the power of science so that it serves humanity. I honestly see TVP less of a system that wont work, and more of a system that removes personal choice from individuals at all levels of society. I would not give up free choice for Utopia.
Originally posted by inimalistWould people stop calling TVP Utopia? It's not, A Utopia can't exist because society always gets better.
the MIT paper that you are quoting actually states that with $1b (AMD) investment, over 15 years the technology would be good enough to garner 200ZJ (http://www.homebuilding.co.uk/feature/geothermal-energy-heating-revolution)also, much like solar power, having the ability to get the power is much different than supplying the power to anyone. There is no power plant in the world capable of producing 200ZJ of geothermal power. You are correct, once those plants are up and running they can probably use the existing power grid, they just aren't up and running.
See, I think it could work. And I'll even give you (though I don't agree) that there are individuals who could efficiently run such a system without corruption.
My problem with it at this point is that it is feudalism, only assuming that the leaders are nice to the people. People don't have choices. Someone has to organize what scientists/engineers/labourers do.
Like, I personally want to some day research the neuroscience of beliefs. However, in your system, it appears that there would be an organizational body that would assume my time would be better spent researching something more applied, and all of a sudden I HAVE to research, say child development, because that is what has been determined to be better for humanity.
This is based entirely off of what you posted. TVP says that they want to redirect the power of science so that it serves humanity. I honestly see TVP less of a system that wont work, and more of a system that removes personal choice from individuals at all levels of society. I would not give up free choice for Utopia.
What The Venus Project does is works to make society better, with no need for profit, laws and inefficiency, as they're no longer relevant.
Originally posted by lord xyz
Would people stop calling TVP Utopia? It's not, A Utopia can't exist because society always gets better.What The Venus Project does is works to make society better, with no need for profit, laws and inefficiency, as they're no longer relevant.
ok, so it isn't a utopia. My point was that, even if it were. Even if it were a system that would provide me with everything that I could possibly ever want, the fact that I don't have the freedom to work as I please, doing what I want, and get to decide what compensation I deserve for that work to me makes it not worthwhile.
Like, you have to see that an almost absolutely powerful central executive must exist in TVP.
I guess one of my biggest questions is, what does TVP do about people who absolutely don't want to live by the rules of the system. Are they excluded? are they jailed? (To use an earlier example) what do you do with the engineer who refuses to make spaceships when he is told he must?
Originally posted by inimalistYou do have the freedom to work where you want. This system provides more freedom, it gives you freedom from poverty and social costs etc. When you take money out of the scenario, you see how much easier things are.
ok, so it isn't a utopia. My point was that, even if it were. Even if it were a system that would provide me with everything that I could possibly ever want, the fact that I don't have the freedom to work as I please, doing what I want, and get to decide what compensation I deserve for that work to me makes it not worthwhile.
Originally posted by inimalistHow?
Like, you have to see that an almost absolutely powerful central executive must exist in TVP.
Originally posted by inimalistFind out why he refuses and think up a solution.
I guess one of my biggest questions is, what does TVP do about people who absolutely don't want to live by the rules of the system. Are they excluded? are they jailed? (To use an earlier example) what do you do with the engineer who refuses to make spaceships when he is told he must?
Since the venus project and zeitgeist movement are based upon unconditional love and understanding, things like this won't actually happen. THey'd be no longer relevant.
Originally posted by lord xyz
You do have the freedom to work where you want. This system provides more freedom, it gives you freedom from poverty and social costs etc. When you take money out of the scenario, you see how much easier things are.
so if nobody wants to build the buildings required for people to live in, what does TVP do?
Originally posted by lord xyz
How?
well, things need to get done. In order for things to get done, people and resources need to be organized.
a, b, c, . . .
Originally posted by lord xyz
Find out why he refuses and think up a solution.
he doesn't want to and does not recognize the authority of TVP to tell him what he should or should not do.
Originally posted by lord xyz
Since the venus project and zeitgeist movement are based upon unconditional love and understanding, things like this won't actually happen. THey'd be no longer relevant.
personal choice would no longer be relevant?
I decided to do this in a post as opposed to an Edit, its somewhat important:
So, the statement: "You do have the freedom to work where you want." is not congruent with the implied meaning behind: "Find out why he refuses and think up a solution."
In the context of the second, it is true that there is a large controlling body trying to make you do something.
Originally posted by inimalistNo, it's more of a compromise. Saying it's forcing us what to do is like saying the truth is forcing us to believe it, rather than letting us believe what we want.
I decided to do this in a post as opposed to an Edit, its somewhat important:So, the statement: "You do have the freedom to work where you want." is not congruent with the implied meaning behind: "Find out why he refuses and think up a solution."
In the context of the second, it is true that there is a large controlling body trying to make you do something.
I'd reply to the other post, but I'm feeling pretty lethargic right now.
Originally posted by lord xyz
No, it's more of a compromise. Saying it's forcing us what to do is like saying the truth is forcing us to believe it, rather than letting us believe what we want.I'd reply to the other post, but I'm feeling pretty lethargic right now.
Actually, I'll take that analogy.
However, I also think this is apt, the human brain is not designed to believe what i true, but in fact what is most salient and important.
Sure, the truth isn't forcing anyone to believe it. And thus, most people believe the stuff that does force them to believe.
The reason I asked if you believed in evolution earlier is that, it appears that you attribute aspects of animal behaviour to market ad financial forces. The confines of what it means to be a biological organism may make the "do, for free, what betters the common man" impossible without some form of coercion. Thats sort of where I am coming from. People left to their own devices are unlikely to believe what you and I would call rational and scientific truths. People need to be educated in that way, else the natural "belief" and "truth" mechanisms of the brain will make them believe what is emotionally salient.
Similarly, I believe that if people are left to their devices organizationally, they will produce that which is the most biologically salient. Which, imho, is not the spontaneous evaluation of world needs, followed by self-organization to accomplish the solution to said needs. I wont say people wouldn't be productive, or that there would be no incentive, however, I feel the productivity would be highly determined by personal choice rather than human need if there were no body established to direct the productivity.
lol, don't worry about responding quickly or any of that.