/sci/ - Science & Math

this fucking sucks man

you`re taking orthodoxism to a whole new level.

Seems you have already made conclusions about all different things and build upon this temple of "truths".

Please don`t pretend as if you know what people`s needs and desires are.
Leave more room forsuspicion. There might be things you didn`t even know you don`t know.

>>2189058
Citation needed for Orthodoxism.
Also do you mean "Suspicion (emotion) is a feeling of distrust or perceived guilt for someone or something." or "skepticism is loosely used to denote any questioning attitude, or some degree of doubt regarding claims that are elsewhere taken for granted. Usually meaning those who follow the evidence, versus those who are skeptical of the evidence (see:Denier) Skepticism is most controversial when it questions beliefs that are taken for granted by most of the population. For example, in the U.S. skeptics distrust claims by chiropractic, while most U.S. citizens accept them."?

>>2189089
yes

> The Society must be scalable and should not fail under high population
How high is high? Cause that might just be impossible.

>>2189103
I'm going to take that as the mathematician's answer in which case you're assuming my use of "or" as logical inclusive OR. At least one of the two propositions I presented is true according to you.

Citation still needed for Orthodoxism. I used google and wikipedia, I found no article referencing that outside of Roman Catholic Orthodoxy which would be inappropriate in this context.

>no money

All my money, make it happen

>>2189123
High population here refers to as compared to available and sustainable living space. If the society advances to space-faring and extra-terrestrial colonization, high can be comeasurably higher than if the scope is limited to the Earth.

Given current technology, high would be Earth-bound 12 billion.

You "society founded on scientific method" sounds good.
You can start by applying the scientific method to test how well it would work, by doing a sociological experiment. If the results are good it could just get implemented fully.

1st Ask a question or make an observation.
2nd Write a Hypothesis
3rd Make Predictions
4th Perform Tests or Experiments
5th State Your Conclusions

OP seems to be at the 1st or 2nd stage of the scientific method.

oh look another thread about the pipe dream technocracy

>>2189181
Oh look, another person getting in the way of scientific inquiry on /sci/.

So basically something similar to my project?
I like.

>>2189198
this isn't scientific inquiry, it's mutual masturbation

>>2189204
Similar, yes. Details may differ greatly, but the idea is to move towards a scientific technocratic cyberocracy. Not technocratic as in the technocracy movement of the early 50s in the US, but technocratic in the sense that when something was proposed the most technically qualified among us would be responsible for expert testimony and evaluation of the proposal. Not cyberocracy in the sense of a society ran by AIs, but a cyberocracy in the sense of rule by systematic feedback and regulation.

>>2189207
Are you attempting to suppress discussion regarding a hypothesis before the hypothesis is fully formulated by the reviewing peers?

You are drawing a conclusion before the hypothesis has been formed, before predictions are made, before tests have been performed, and before conclusions have been stated; therefore, you're mostly likely hypocritical and are in fact blocking scientific inquiry.

>>2189244
That sounds pretty much like my idea to be honest. Though automation of jobs would be far more prominent.

>>2189207
Just in case there is doubt regarding what exactly constitutes scientific inquiry:
An inquiry is any process that has the aim of augmenting knowledge, resolving doubt, or solving a problem. A theory of inquiry is an account of the various types of inquiry and a treatment of the ways that each type of inquiry achieves its aim.

Popper concluded that a hypothesis, proposition, or theory is "scientific" only if it is, among other things, falsifiable. That is, falsifiability is a necessary (but not sufficient) criterion for scientific ideas. Popper asserted that unfalsifiable statements are non-scientific, although not without relevance.

>>2189258
Feel free to elaborate on your concept. I'd enjoy discussing it within the context of this thread.

>>2189181
>>2189207

Jews.

Anyway. This place still might not work after a single generation. Mankind has an incredible appetite for distractions and our children would likely be lazy and reliant.

Humans are machines which eat, sleep, and work. And we need to do all three to remain somewhat happy and useful.

It shouldn't be incentive that drives work but fear of punishment. There should be a merit system based on contribution to knowledge. Art should be considered a viable field for those not scientifically inclined.

There's a name for a society like that, OP.
The Borg.

>>2189293
Think an almost exact copy of Manna (http://www.marshallbrain.com/manna5.htm)) but with a central libertarian government that allocates some extra resources to scientists and engineers for projects agreed by the government and the people to which it pertains to. The voting system would be something similar. The government picks a list of 25 candidates or so with amazing backgrounds (So the Minister for Health would be some guy that's been a neurosurgeon that's got a Ph.D and have saved like fifty times more lives than everyone else) or something along those lines. Then, doctors, molecular biologists and college graduates for biology and health and so forth comprise of 60% of the vote, the government 10% of the vote, and 30% from the general population.
This is just the rough outline so far; I will be refining it far more closer to the deadline (think 2030.)

>>2189326
>Humans are machines which eat, sleep, and work. And we need to do all three to remain somewhat happy and useful.
Human bodies are machines which require nutrition and sleep to perform work. However, I would not necessarily categorize people as machines. Any system or theory which fails to acknowledge the aesthetic, functional, and usable needs, desires, and choices of people fails to account for the totality of the human person.

>It shouldn't be incentive that drives work but fear of punishment. There should be a merit system based on contribution to knowledge. Art should be considered a viable field for those not scientifically inclined.
I totally disagree with this. People are better motivated extrinsically by positive incentives rather than negative incentives. The best motivation comes from intrinsic motivation. Intrinsic motivation arises from permissive novel challenges which are just inside a person's capability and just outside the person's confidence.

The current argument that people are lazy and reliant is a self-fulfilling prophesy. People work and express themselves creatively, intelligently, and productively when given the time and tools.

http://www.ted.com/talks/dan_pink_on_motivation.html

So.. how free is this society you are talking about??
i guess you should mention more about their economy, its obviously planned right?
and how are they going to obtain the resources to make pretty much all jobs automated.. when you need a fraction of energy when you use human labor. the education infrastructure would be gigantic too.

Doing science is only in reach for very rich societies.. that have a surplus of energy after spending it in more basic needs.

So unless we discover Fusion.. or make some important technological breakthroughs.. your fake society is going to fail

I wouldn't utilize automation where ever possible simply for its own sake. Stupid people need jobs too.

>>2189386
We discovered fusion almost a century ago. Please try to keep up.

>>2189366
mm not because they are very good doctors it means that they are very capable at positions of high command..

Besides in technocratic societies.. decision making would just be a matter of probability.. even today theres a lot of industries that take decisions of buying or selling products, and maintenance fully automated (i.e with a fucking mac)

>>2189401
dude dont be an ass.. you know what im talking about..

a controlled fusion reaction for a practical period of time.

>>2189404
>mm not because they are very good doctors it means that they are very capable at positions of high command..
That's sort of a given.

>>2189366
There is one of the major differences between our models. Rather than building a government which privileged the STEAM occupations, I propose building a participatory government comprised of the pool of talent of the people charged with the responsibility to maximize the realization of people's potential.

>>2189353
While I realize this is probably supposed to be a jest, as a criticism it's problematic. The Borg preclude individuality, diversity, and creativity.

The society would be weaker for suppressing rather than appreciating such characteristics.

>>2189424
>I propose building a participatory government comprised of the pool of talent of the people charged with the responsibility to maximize the realization of people's potential.
This is sooorta what I want to do, just I fear that a voluntary/participatory government would be prone to many fluctuations in quality, plans and amount of people that are 'in.'

>>2189386
Free as in free speech and iterating towards free as in free beer as well.

Before we can talk of whether the economy is free or planned or otherwise, we first have to nail down what an empirical evidence-base economy looks like. If we recognize that the reason the monetary systems work is because they represent a transfer of information from one system to another which in turn can be seen as transferring differences to perform useful work.

Money is man made; time, space, and information/material is not.

Profit is impossible globally in any physical system.

As for questions of energy? A system only dissipated energy in the form of heat when an irreversible process has been performed that is when a bit has been deleted or copied. The loss of energy as heat is the inefficiency of the system. With time and effort, we can iterate the system towards Carnot efficiency and we can produce greater amounts of power via renewable sources. Solar power alone would satisfy global requirements.

>>2189472
>Solar power alone would satisfy global requirements.
Fuck that shit. It's inherently inefficient and unstable.

>>2189472
lol isnt millions and millions spent in figuring out how to make electrical and mechanical systems more efficient?.. and we barely make any progress compared to the 80s-70s specially in mechanical systems which require a lot of energy. So, even when we did make some progress in electronics.. it is nothing compared to how much energy is dissipated as heat in technology that actually do the work and not just regulate it (which would be the case of automation systems.)

>>2189515
Do you know how oil, natural gas, wind and so forth was originally created?
Also, space-based solar power in GEO.

>>2189542
Oil and natural gas aren't sustainable, wind faces many of the same challenges as solar, and space based power is worthless nonsense.

>>2189542
i hope the technology would be available by the time oil isnt capable of sustaining our society.. its a risky bet we are taking here. but i guess we figure out that we take such bet just years ago.

>>2189555
>and space based power is worthless nonsense.
Are
You
FUCKING
KIDDING
ME

>>2189555
yeah dumbass but if we built it we are going to have "unlimited resources" or do you want to go through the whole process of making oil?

>>2189539
Hypothetically? Yes. Practically, no. Most of the electrical and mechanical power systems we have today were developed as part of basic research before privatization of research. Also, millions and millions of dollars may seem like a lot, but compare that to the billions and billions spent on cosmetics and pharmaceutical research.

Here's the thing to ask yourself, is it in the best interest of the decision makers for the power companies to increase efficiency, decrease power loss, and reduce the price of power to you? That's to say would they make a greater or lesser profit?

Second thing to ask yourself is "Are you familiar with planned obsolescence?"
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Planned_obsolescence

If a person gets cancer, GDP grows. If a person is cured of cancer, the GDP shrinks. Profit motive would have us prefer people getting incurable cancer to curing people of cancer due to the cost and potential for profiting off of treatment.

>>2189580
If they increase efficiency they would be able to sell more energy by less use of resource.. that seems like a gain to me. is not like coal, gas or oil doesnt have any value raw.
But anyhow

So you want to focus human effort into a list of well defined goals? instead of looping around and spending resources in mindless bullshit like cosmetics?

i agree with you on that.. but how is the individual going to be rewarded for their efforts??

just by status?? i know that during the middle ages, people didnt care about status, because they were pretty much the same. and they knew they "couldn't achieve everything they want". but the people was regulated through religion.. so how are you going to keep people busy, entertained and happy

>>2189649
i mean if we live in a technocratic society.. happiness would be reduced to a bunch of chains of chemical reactions .. so we might use drugs for that.. and we might be able to regulate cognitive capabilities by using genetic engineering.. but then again who is going to flip the burgers?? well we maybe need retarded people that handle this.. and we would just drug them constantly to keep the happy or motivated..

does this sound kinda familiar already OP?

>>2189677
>but then again who is going to flip the burgers?

>freedom of and from religion
You have to pick one or the other. You can't have both.

>The Society would reject ideology which...
How does the society enforce which ideologies are adopted by individuals? Expulsion from the society of those who don't conform?

>>2189705
mm what if you dont like fast ____ (introduce whatever product or service here)

i think it would be at least 100 years when we start seeing robots as versatile as that.

>>2189726
The Society would reject ideology which...
>How does the society enforce which ideologies are adopted by individuals? Expulsion from the society of those who don't conform?
The society does not enforce the adoption or rejection of ideologies at the individual level. The formative documents for the society would not be formed from a political ideology.

Very much like how the society would treat religion, society would treat ideology. People have them, people like them, people want them, but the society is strictly neutral about them excepting where they are destructive to people or attempt to subvert the function of the society.

In short, if you're ideological that's fine, the society would not be.

>>2189760
Society is made up of individuals. If the individuals have an ideology, the society has it.

>>2189744
>>2189677
>>2189649
First let's divide satisfaction from happiness. For the purposes of this conversation, happiness refers to the emotional state of joy or optimism.

Satisfaction arises from the quelling, elimination, negation of cognitive dissonance.

I don't know about you, but I do what I do because I love to do it. My reward comes from the fact that I can discuss almost any topic I particularly care to, from the fact that I can write programs that solve problems in elegant and efficient ways that others appreciate, from the fact that I am respected by my friends and family for my capabilities, and valued by my teachers for my contributions.

Satisfaction comes from within and is facilitated by adaptable environmental factors. Give an artist a paint brush and an easel upon which to work, they will produce art. Give an engineer a lever and a fulcrum upon which to rest it, they shall move the world. Give a scientist a 15 mile cyclotron and a system with which to analyze it's operation, they shall reveal the workings of the world.

Money doesn't motivate those things. In many cases, it hurts them.

>>2189769
>implying that the society is functionally equivalent to the people of the society.
>A implies B. B does not necessarily imply A.
I suppose you would argue the US social system is Christian because some percentage of the people who operate it are Christian. I suppose you'd argue that the scientific community is religious because some of those who participate in it are. I suppose you would argue that a hammer is holy because someone deemed holy has used a hammer.

>>2189812
For simplicity, assume that every single individual happens to adopt a certain ideology. In what sense will the society not then have that ideology? What will prevent laws and constitutions from being altered to conform to that ideology?

>>2189847
Under that case, nothing would stop it, but you have much larger problems if the society homogenized like that. Second, under those conditions it doesn't really matter what the social system is supposed to be it comes down to what those people agree to.

It's like picking up a game and altering the rules to the place where the core game-play no longer resembles the original game.

Now, assuming that the people have some ideology but still agree to run the society by the methods laid out, they would be able to pursue the objectives of their ideology in so far as they remain within the boundaries of the society.

At any point if the methods are ignored, the system will still be the playing field, but the people will being acting out a fiction in ignorance of objective reality. Which could be as bad as what we have now or worse. See theocracy for an idea of how much worse.

>>2189795
thats exactly the problem.. in that society being an engineer or an artist would be represented as status.. there would be people that arent capable of doing a lot of activities that "give status", so there will always be this gap between the artist, the engineer, and scientist with the ones that work in lesser activities, knowing that theres not much they can do about it.

>>2189959
Aren't capable. Elaborate on that point. What kind of people aren't capable? What kind of activities are these people incapable of and why?
I've yet to meet someone who didn't have something they were capable of which I did not find valuable to the society.

Even ignorant religious people have redeemable traits, my own father is an ignorant religious nut. He imparted to me a sense of self-worth, principled discipline, and unshakable integrity. He was abandoned at the side of a New Jersey turnpike when he was 13 and never got higher formal education than what he had then. He became a truck driver and has done that, done it well, for decades.

Last time I saw him, he had learned how to use computers, repair them, and was even learning to program them in his 40s.

>>2189677
>but then again who is going to flip the burgers?
Just because it's not happening in the US, doesn't mean it's not happening in the world. The Land of the Rising Sun has been working on automating their society for decades now, and they have made significant progress in that regard. They've implemented robotic waiters, cooks, and restaurants.

http://www.weirdasianews.com/2009/08/17/robots-flip-pancakes-serve-sushi/

>>2190005

so what your dad doesnt represent the majority of the population. most of the population crave status, respect and a feeling that they are worthy.

i mean a society like you are pointing out are putting scientists, engineers and artists in the highest value.. and not everyone would achieve that. no matter how hard they try.. there would be a majority of % that are required to do lesser activities, and pretty much stay there.

if you are talking about everyone making a little part for the greater good.. then you area talking about communism. which is not good or bad.. but probably unachievable

>>2190035
i wonder whats more energy efficient.. a college kid or high school graduate to do that job.. or a very complex robot that requires maintenance and a lot of resources to work in a menial task

gee.

>>2190075
Pre-cook and package the patty at a centralized factory. It's thawed out and warmed at the actual distribution center for consumption. At the actual location you'll probably only need one person to oversee loading the patties onto a conveyor belt heater.

>>2190038
>There would be a majority of % that are required to do lesser activities, and pretty much stay there.
Who? Who is incapable of being trained, educated, or otherwise taking advantage of opportunities offered to them? I'd like citations and statistics because if they exist it poses a problem for the society; however, I doubt they exist in significant numbers if the do exist at all. Our society, as a global entity, operates with at least bear minimum functionality. If what you're proposing was true, I'd expect that the society would have obliterated a long time ago.

Most people I've ever met have done what they can to make a better life for themselves, for others, for their children as best as they know how and are able given conditions.

Communism: a sociopolitical movement that aims for a stateless and classless society structured upon common ownership of the means of production, free access to articles of consumption, the end of wage labour and private property in the means of production and real estate.

1. a theory or system of social organization based on the holding of all property in common, actual ownership being ascribed to the community as a whole or to the state.
2. ( often initial capital letter ) a system of social organization in which all economic and social activity is controlled by a totalitarian state dominated by a single and self-perpetuating political party.

I'm fairly close to calling you out on unsubstantiated elitism.

>>2190075
>implying that tremendous amounts of resources aren't wasted in packaging, transporting, mechanically preparing at the factory, and accommodating a human being into the process of something which can be made completely mechanical like a giant vending machine.

You presuppose that robots take tremendous resources to operate. Resources above and beyond what would be necessary to ensure the college kid an acceptable quality and standard of living. Kid needs to eat 2000 Calories per day, needs ten hours of sleep, needs a place to live, needs to operate a car, needs healthcare, needs entertainment, needs vacation time, etc.

The robot will run as close to Carnot efficiency as we can get it using current technological methods for as long as you want. All it needs is a fairly constant supply of power and occasional maintenance.

In my mind, the college kid has better things to be doing than flipping burgers. The kid should be assembling robots, learning to design them, learning to testing them under the direction of engineers, scientist, and artist.

Education can be acquired by participation. Almost everyone is capable of learning anything. Almost everyone is willing to learn anything if you help them.
Almost everyone contributes what they have to contribute.

>>2190075
>implying that tremendous amounts of resources aren't wasted in packaging, transporting, mechanically preparing at the factory, and accommodating a human being into the process of something which can be made completely mechanical like a giant vending machine.

You presuppose that robots take tremendous resources to operate. Resources above and beyond what would be necessary to ensure the college kid an acceptable quality and standard of living. Kid needs to eat 2000 Calories per day, needs ten hours of sleep, needs a place to live, needs to operate a car, needs healthcare, needs entertainment, needs vacation time, etc.

The robot will run as close to Carnot efficiency as we can get it using current technological methods for as long as you want. All it needs is a fairly constant supply of power and occasional maintenance.

In my mind, the college kid has better things to be doing than flipping burgers. The kid should be assembling robots, learning to design them, learning to testing them under the direction of engineers, scientists, and artists.

Education can be acquired by participation. Almost everyone is capable of learning anything. Almost everyone is willing to learn anything if you help them.
Almost everyone contributes what they have to contribute.

>>2190097
LOL why not just eat a piece of turd and call it a day?.. fast food today isnt as shitty as what you are portraying

>>2190141
>Pre-cook and package the patty at a centralized factory. It's thawed out and warmed at the actual distribution center for consumption.
For those not in the know, for hamburgers at McDonalds, Burger King, Carl's Jr, Wendy's and many other fast food places, this is the reality currently. The only difference is that your food is prepared on site by a people working at the establishment.

>>2190141
>Pre-cook and package the patty at a centralized factory. It's thawed out and warmed at the actual distribution center for consumption.
For those not in the know, for hamburgers at McDonalds, Burger King, Carl's Jr, Wendy's and many other fast food places, this is the reality currently. The only difference is that your food is prepared on site by people working at the establishment.

>>2190141
Those patties will be engineered for maximum nutritional quality and shelf life.

>>2190160
Those patties are already engineered for that + or - quality. Technically speaking, there is no mechanical reason we could not engineer cheap high quality meat patties.

Hmmm... I suspect that :D !!s2uh28knASO has no idea about factory farming and current food standards and practices.

>>2190138
>>2190100
lol bring your Taylorism to another place.. i know it sounds very nice but there's a lot of difference between the theory and practice..

Enjoy having a society that their lives revolves around machines.

>>2190204
No :D !!s2uh28knASO. We are the machines.

And then anon was a toaster.

>>2190223
lol enjoy your reductionist approach using the machine-life failed metaphora that descartes had the privilege to shit away and fuck biology for centuries , your basing your whole shit social model into that concept.

thanks for trying tho.

Sauce on photo
Are there anymore in a similar style?

>>2190204
In case it didn't register, I refuted both your assertion that there are a majority of people who are incapable of baseline capabilities, and I refuted your assertion that this is communism.

To elaborate on that point, communism asserts a stateless system which is an absurdity. Any system will have a set of states. Yes, I'm abusing terminology, but the terms aren't too far off from one another. Classless is similarly absurd. Differences are necessary for diversity.

If you must have a division of people, we can divide according to ignorance. Stratification would be according to those who have taken the greatest measure to eliminate their own ignorance by taking advantage of the free open systems of education made available by the society.

People who expect the assistance and care of society do not have the right to stupidity though we acknowledge they do have ignorance from birth under current conditions. Every person who wishes to participate in the society would have the responsibility to become educated. The society in turn would be responsible for offering the means to free universal education to every participant. The consequence for failing this responsibility is criticism. We seek to rehabilitate them and bring them into the society.

If you think free-to-access universal education is impossible, I don't think you've reviewed Germany, Finland, Holland, and Sweden's educational systems.

>>2190250
>>2190223
At this point, it can not be reasonably denied that our bodies are fantastically complex machines with component biochemical nano-machines operating on genetic code.

>>2190268
and yet there are waiters, janitors and truck drivers that live in those countries, wishing to be recognized and famous.. how would that be any different..

>>2190272
>complex
>nano-machines


stating that a system is complex and a machine at the same time is an oxymoron.

you probably trying to use the word complicated..

>>2190346
I meant what I said. Complex is mentioned to denote the degree of difficulty of simulating or computing the system as in to indicate it is not trivial or simple.

Oxymoron would be a combination of terms which leads to a contradictory or dissonant meaning like military intelligence or gun control. Personally, I find complex machine to be a fairly descriptive, complementary, and intuitive phrase.

>>2190327
>and yet there are waiters, janitors and truck drivers that live in those countries, wishing to be recognized and famous.. how would that be any different..
The society's mandate would be to enable them to realize those prospects by giving them the tools and resources with which to succeed. People are effected by various conditioning which impede their ability and desire to seek the degree of personal satisfaction, ambition and accomplishment. Notable amongst them is learned helplessness. The society would be charged with alleviating dissatisfaction wherever it arises.

"We are what we repeatedly do. Excellence, then, is not an act, but a habit.” -Aristotle

“All that we are is the result of what we have thought. The mind is everything. What we think we become.” -Buddha Gautama

“If I tell you that I would be disobeying the [golden rule] and on that account it is impossible for me to keep quiet, you won't be persuaded by me, taking it that I am [lionizing]. And if I tell you that it is the greatest good for a human being to have discussions every day about virtue and the other things you hear me talking about, examining myself and others, and that the unexamined life is not livable for a human being, you will be even less persuaded.” -Socrates