/sci/ - Science & Math

bump for interest

>>1986143
>Anyone up for an intellectual collaboration?
Yea!
>after noticing all the flaws in society
Not sure if want.
>we could design a better one.
Do not want.
>We did some work on it, but it didn't get very far.
No shit, sherlock.

>>1986143 after noticing all the flaws in society and thinking that we could design a better one.

Congratulations, you're the 100,000th person to start a technocracy thread on /sci/. You win 4 internets.

>>1986164
It's really not, it's more of a broad concept. That was just one idea I proposed. Feel free to propose your own ideas for a collaboration.

>>1986164

Just because scientists, engineers, etc design a form a government doesn't have to mean that they are the ones in control of the government. Furthermore, that was worthy of at least 5 internets.

bump for interest. No good ideas though.

This thread is now about wormholes

>>1986190
Don't you mean carrots?

Don't make it a technocracy, i don't want some autistic fucks who don't have any empathy making decisions.

also it cant be some kind of modern communism where everyone is given everything they need and want (mana). It would turn into everyone just basically making themselves feel good, like wanking constantly and then id defs want to kill myself.

i want some kind of evolutionary pressure towards better people. Not like now days how uneducated people are the major procreators.

we also need someway to let the better people breed but once everyone has children, give every child equal oppurtunity or at least minimise inequality as much as possible so that once they become adults its the best people who are going to be most successful and not just the ones who got lucky.

also tax religion.

I WANTS WINGS ! ! !

>>1987265
You could mix a little communism with a class system. A person's education puts them in their income bracket. Middle school - fucking kill yourself. High school - 30grand. Associates - 60grand Bachelors - 90grand. Masters - 150grand. Phd - 200grand. And of course all education would be free because this is a fucking utopia. And if people get lazy and don't work when they're done, that's why have labor camps. FUCK YEA!!!

Try to figure out how to generate planar graphs that are difficult to 4-color.

What about a non-political-theory based community collaboration ?

>>1987265
>Don't make it a technocracy, i don't want some autistic fucks who don't have any empathy making decisions.
What about democratic technocracy?
Democracy is shit because people are dipshits.
Technocracy, while better, has a EXTREMELY large chance of being abused for as soon as mini-Hitler who has fifty Ph.D's gets in he can do basically whatever he wants.
Experts who are eligible and want to run for government for their field are voted on by people that are proficient and involved in that job or field, so, a aerospace engineer can vote for people that want to administrate space travel, or air transportation.

That's the basic gist of it anyway.

Definite bump, sounds like something fun OP.

before we do any of this we need to work out what the ultimate goals of it would be. some people want some matrix style shit where everyone has maximum happiness where as others might have some kind of liberal eugenics idea.

>>1987297
nah, definitely not having education be the sole decider of how much money you get.

>>1987364
What exactly would their job be once they were voted in? They still wouldnt be the ones deciding where the budget would go to. Every person who was voted in would naturally want as much funding as possible. Then we would still need someone who would decide how much to give to each group.

>>1987297
>labor camps.
>FUCK YEA!!!

>>1987395
>budget
>funding
>how much to give
Yeeeaah this is sort of not going to be a part of it.

>>1987414
lol ok. you think people are going to have unlimited resources. but then... why even have people as leaders? we already have everything we could ever need. wait no. people dont want to be in some world where they cant better their lives. Dont think because their lives then would be so much better to ours that they wouldnt have the urge to, its relative to the people they're living with. compared to 50000 years ago people would think we live in a utopia but we still want to improve ourselves even though we have food brought to us, safe shelter, entertainment and sex. no. There will never be a world like you wish there to be. Even if you think it would be so much better, just the fact that i would do everything to not let it happen is proof enough that it wont. You would need a massive majority for this to be possible and i dont have any evidence but i think that there would be enough people like me to stop it.

>>1987437
>you think people are going to have unlimited resources.
No, but enough that worrying about the scarcity of them will become a thing of the past.
>but then... why even have people as leaders? we already have everything we could ever need.
Well first off, this would be a very laid-back government, maintaining basic laws and automation of factories and power plants and so forth. If there was absolutely no government, it would be very easy for some tyrant to come along and fuck shit up. Anarchy is to government what bald is to hair colour. It is not a viable alternative, just a transitional stage.
>wait no. people dont want to be in some world where they cant better their lives.
People want to be in a world that allows them the most freedom. This includes economic freedom.
You can better your life. The very basis of this society/government would be to allow people to shape their life exactly how they want it, provided it doesn't seriously impinge on others views.
>Dont think because their lives then would be so much better to ours that they wouldnt have the urge to, its relative to the people they're living with.
If you're talking about e-peen (well, IRLpeen) people will ALWAYS have some way of proving they're better than other people. Money just stops becoming one of these things. I'm sure that people prefer having an almost utopian-society to being able to say 'I HAVE A PORSCHE HE DOESN'T WOLOLOLO'
>no. There will never be a world like you wish there to be.

[continued]

>>1987459
>>1987437
[continuing]
>never
Doubtful, I'm gonna dedicate the next 30 years of my life trying to make it happen.
>Even if you think it would be so much better, just the fact that i would do everything to not let it happen is proof enough that it wont.
You don't have to be a part of it. You don't have to contribute. But if you're going to stop US from enjoying a better standard of life, oh, well. Then we're going to have a problem.
>You would need a massive majority for this to be possible
NOPE.avi
Just a hundred thousand likeminded individuals. And many, many more will come when it's shown in action.
>and i dont have any evidence but i think that there would be enough people like me to stop it.
>and I don't have any evidence
Yep. Oh, I know there'll always be some brainwashed/hardcore conservative mob that doesn't want the system. But the above applies. You don't have to be a part of it. We won't try to get in your way.

>Several months ago a few friends and I had the idea to create a "civilization framework" after noticing all the flaws in society and thinking that we could design a better one.
Unfortunately you didn't notice the flaw that "anything other than anarcho-capitalism is violence".

(your "society without flaws" has the flaw of being violent and also centrally-planned, it would be doomed to failure and is completely immoral)

>>1987459
>>1987462
>you don't have to be a part of it
alright, i take back the shit about not letting it happen then.
>People want to be in a world that allows them the most freedom. This includes economic freedom.
your world is the opposite of freedom buddy.
>No, but enough that worrying about the scarcity of them will become a thing of the past.
people breed exponentially, unless you force them to not then you're society is going to be just like every other one.

In a world where there are no incentives to do anything, then the majority of people will do nothing. You're population will be seen as the new age junkies.

everyone should love everyone man

>>1987481
>people breed exponentially
[citation needed]

also violence is immoral, you're advocating something as evil as slavery.

>1987537
how am i advocating slavery or violence? Just because i don't want a world where theres no reason to do anything since everyone gets given everything they need regardless.

>[citation needed]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/An_Essay_on_the_Principle_of_Population

all life grows exponentially without anything limiting it. this is also something which is key to evolution

>>1987481
>your world is the opposite of freedom buddy.
...How?

>In a world where there are no incentives to do anything, then the majority of people will do nothing. You're population will be seen as the new age junkies.
Nothing as in absolutely nothing? Or nothing as in nothing important? In the case of the latter, that's uh, already happening.
And you fail to account for the fact that they have complete ECONOMIC FREEDOM. This means they can travel anywhere within the system, do any activity, have a party, paint a picture, race with other drivers on a speedway, and so forth. Since they have practically unlimited time with no obligations for work, and they do not feel stressed from not having enough money or worrying about their future financial security, well. Society works very different under those pretenses.

>>1987549
>..How?
Unless you force people not to breed then your society will eventually fall apart. Forcing birth control on people is disgusting and definitely not free.

I meant absolutely nothing. People wouldnt bother, there is no reason to. Anyway its irrelivant because you're society will become overpopulated just like every other one.