/biz/ - Business & Finance

Bumping with more nanomachines, son.

>>3675

I don't know what 70% of that means but I like your .gifs OP.

>>3507
none of these gifs need lube because an atom is ~99.9% empty space

>>3507
Ignoring all the retardation in your OP.

I would actually love to discuss what the economy of a post-scarcity society would look like.
I agree with your point of creating artificial scarcity, it would be the logical step for businesses. Plus it's already being implemented with software licenses so it isn't too big of a leap.

I remember an SMBC comic saying, in a world without scarce resources, the only scarce resource will be scarce resources. So the business sector would be entirely dedicated to the creation of scarce resources.

>>4041
What retardation?

Nice quote. As a species we are using as many resources as we can, as quickly as we can. So yes, it would make sense that we continue to treat a post-scarcity economic environment as a scare environment because that's the path of least resistance. The problem with that though is that I believe it would stifle creativity and industrial diversity among utility maximizer.

>>3507
3D printing is going to change so much.
All these stores that are getting in to it early are going to get so much money because they will become the primary manufacturers of this new generation of product creation.

It is going to be a shaky start, it already is as DRM is being placed in to machines to prevent copyright infringement, weapon production and such. Easy to get around though.

I'm honestly thinking of getting a 3D printer by the end of the year, they are so cheap now, it was only a few years ago that even the lower ends were 4 digits, now they are around mid-trips regions, which is great for an entry level printer of such a new industry. (well, sort of new, personal 3D printing)

So many are going to try do everything to stop it.
Luckily the ones that are getting in and embracing it will bring us an era of glory.

Combine it with a post-scarcity society when space mining kicks off (if it does), humanity will go through a larger change than we did from the previous centuries in to the industrial revolutions.
And we will then finally be able to finally enter the true space age.

Adam Smith had the luxury to be on the very cusp of the industrial revolution in Great Britain. He envisioned similar unlimited potential for economic change when the machines that defined the age became more and more commonplace. His free market concepts run hand-in-hand with the changes we're seeing despite them being much more diverse and concentrated due to higher distribution of technology and the greater industrial potential that 3d printing will bring.

My economic knowledge is fairly humble. I've only taken a single class in it so far. So if I'm crazy, to correlate these subjects, call me out on it.

Society wasn't ready for the industrial revolution. But technological developments don't wait for our social adaptions to catch up. Perhaps we aren't ready for 3d printing. There's no way to prepare for how vast the change will be to our society. It could even be banned outright since no one could be trusted not to build a weapon.

That thing Google is working on off in the ocean has me interested.

High quality thread OP. Thanks to contributing positively to this new board

>>5020
What thing do you mean?

Could nanotech be the key to bringing back manufacturing to the US?

>>4947

> It could even be banned outright since no one could be trusted not to build a weapon.

a lot of places did that with the printing press, to little avail

you can't stop good ideas from spreading

>>3507
Shit OP is that a new kind of fleshlight? I'd put my dick in it.

>>4947
looks like it will shake itself to death

>>3507
A small number of companies control the supply of 3d printer supplies and the large machines that can actually do shit have stayed at around the same price and functionality for years. The main growth is in the small and useless 3d printers (inb4 printed jewelry), it's got a very long time to grow but prosthesis and similar niches where people need customization suit it well.

Nanomanufacturing isn't going to come in a few years, more like a few decades. You'll see a boom in robotics before that. Right now nanotechnology just means chemistry.

Also there isn't such a thing as a post scarcity world. There will always be logistical issues and market gaps to deal with.

Artificial scarcity is for chumps like Zynga that want to go out of business, take a profitable company for your business model like Valve. When they say "artificial scarcity" they mean hats and other status/competition items, not serious things that remove functionality from the product.

>>4180
>space mining

Again, robotics. It's all about robotics ultimately.

Economics is just about the logical rules of how all people must act. It doesn't change with changes in technology. Supply and demand worked the same way a thousand years ago as they do today. Technological innovation certainly allows for greater productive capabilities, and I'm excited to see all the new products that people will be able to make thanks to these advances, but technological advances are only able to be put in practice once people have saved up enough capital to be able to invest into such projects. The steam engine was invented in ancient Greece, but it was only able to be practically adapted into the world once it was cheap enough to invest in. Economic advances spur on technological growth, not the other way around.

The idea that we can live in a "post-scarcity" world is just nonsense though that is misunderstanding the word scarcity. If we lived in a post-scarcity world, there would be no need to economize in the first place. Asking whether the economy could "adapt" to that is a meaningless question in a world where there is no economizing.

And finally, Austrian School > Chicago School. Economics is a logically deductive, a priori study, melon farmer.

Vertical farming

>>3507
algaculture.

>>7798
As of now, they use too much energy.
As for their similar counterpart, vertical gardens- they use too much water!

>>3939
Who asked?

>>7522
>Implying we're not experiencing a boom in robotics right now.
>Implying nano structures can't be synthesized through chemistry.
>Implying fusion and nano-manufacturing won't be the key to a post-scarcity reality.
>Implying Artificial Scarcity hasn't already been used to limit the functionality of some physical products.

>>9878

only so many you can replace until what youre repalcing dies, and thus, decrease need on what youre killing

robotics is suicide

>>3507
the next Big thing will be something that makes us more lazy.