/sci/ - Science & Math

>I knew how he held his penis when he stood at a urinal

So, should I commence dump?

>>2335566
It makes no sense.
Having taken drugs several decades ago makes you a drug user (according to article IV)??
When was article IV introduces? If it was after the 70's, doesn't this make it a ex post facto law? (Retroactive law)

>>2335587

Oh yes please.

>>2335720

>>2335734

>>2335741

>>2335753

>>2335766

>>2335775

>>2335781

>>2335790

>>2335798
Boy typing out every single captcha is annoying, but I still prefer it to the spam. I'm guessing mot isn't trying to find a work-around anymore.

>>2335808
>>2335808
All that guys is trying to find is a reach around

>>2335808
>>2335811
Lol.
*moot

>>2335811
Sorry, spending time in New Jersey has apparently caused me to use that sort of grammar when typing.

>>2335813
>>2335815
Eyyyyyyyy

>>2335825

>>2335753
THIS MAKES ME SO ANGRY

SO ANGRY. IMAGINE IF SCIENCE WAS IN THE PLACE OF NATIONAL DEFENSE QWO)PJDIOQWJDQO

WE SPEND 80 BILLION A YEAR ON FUCKING INTELLIGENCE.

>>2335829

>>2335831
>WE SPEND 80 BILLION A YEAR ON FUCKING INTELLIGENCE.
Getting ripped off bad huh?
Wololololololo

>>2335825
The entire American media sucks...too ratings focused rather than journalism focused. Sure they ask tough questions when it doesn't matter, but in times when a free press is REALLY important they might as well be state controlled.

>>2335753
National defense 59%? Holy shit. That is fucking insane. I refuse to believe that.

>>2335836
>>2335843
It's 67% of the federal discretionary budget

>>2335841
I must fight the corporations! media said
No media, you are the corporations
And then media was Fox News

>>2335851
keep goin bro.

also fuck yeah lsd

>>2335843
Like I said, 80 billion on intelligence. Then they spend a shitload on weapons research. Plus look up our air force arsenals. A modern fighter jet costs 100 million dollars, and we buy a good amount of them when we have perfectly good ones that are relatively old.

Then the RESEARCH for a modern fighter jet is measured in billions, we discharge 200000 rounds for every insurgent we kill, transport is a bitch, etc etc. Then there's feeding troops and buying their guns and aircraft carriers and submarines...

Not to mention the money we spend on nukes.

>>2335863
How would we explain all this to a dispassionate, extraterrestrial observer? What account would we give of our stewardship of the planet earth?

We have heard the rationales offered by the superpowers. We know who speaks for the nations; but who speaks for the human species? Who speaks for earth?

captcha: excuses Guattes

>>2335775
Because energy can be transported across the globe, rite?

>>2335883
They don't need to be concentrated in one area, and I think the point of the image was just to show that solar isn't some fuckhuge thing that needs to cover the entire planet. I do not want all our power coming from solar either; unless space-based.

>I knew how he held his penis when he stood at a urinal

brb, lsd

>>2335896

>>2335896
How is that pic a bad thing?

>>2335896
One thing to note was that one video about solar roads. Perfect idea. Roads are already a million dollars a mile and already cut a swath of destruction through natural landscape. Might as well make them a doubly useful scar on the earth, right?

The statistic was that replacing all of the roads into solar panels running at 15% efficiency would meet 3 times our national energy requirements. We're already going to spend billions over the next few years maintaining them, might as well make it an investment that pays in dividends and simultaneously doesn't eat up fossil fuels (petroleum is in asphault) and reduces our dependancy on them (by providing enough power to hardly have to use coal power plants) and perhaps even allow us to reduce dependency on oil (by having a lot of cheap energy to make nationwide electric cars realistic).

There. A solution that doesn't involve infringing on nature any more than we already do.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ep4L18zOEYI

>>2335913
Conservatives and white supremacists having worse English skills than many illegal immigrants

>>2335929

>>2335922
Solar highways will actually be used extensively throughout the Technocratic Republic of Sci.

>>2335943
Before I decided that I was going to spend money on /g/ if I came into a lot of money (like 100 million).

But I've decided. If I come into 100 million dollars through some weird circumstance 10 million is going to be /sci/'s. We'll do some cool shit with it.

>>2335943
>>2335950
You're Anonymous and on 4chan. Proof nao.

>>2335958
He said if. Chill.

>>2335963
Oh shit, sorry

>>2335966

>>2335972

>>2335974

>>2335958
It's just daydreaming. I guess I should probably keep it to myself. A man can hope though :(

>>2335977

>>2335984

>>2335987
>>2335982
Better times are coming.

While you're here, Inurdaes, check this out.

http://seasteading.org/seastead.org/book_beta

Yes, the guy's a libertarian anarchist dude. That method would be a decent way to get the Technocratic Republic of /sci/ going, though.

>>2335995
Hello Mad Scientist
I'll take a look at it

>>2335966
Equating social left and right-ness and fiscal left and right-ness always bugs me. I prefer to set them up as different axises.

How many pics you got left?

>>2336001
I start reading that story some anon was posting and /sci/ turns to /b/shit

>>2336053
Many

>>2336056
Most of the criticism of capitalism made in your posts wouldn't be valid if we got rid of government.

>>2336070
You sir, are retarded.
Good day.

>>2336070
Governments do serve their role. That's why I posted that book. The general idea could be summed up as free market governments, but it offers a lot of pragmatic information as well.

>>2336078
>>2336083
>>2336070
Wut, I wasn't reading that one. There was another thread about a story where some guy and his house get transported to a tropical planet in a binary star system.

>>2336089
I would assert that ignoring history is irrational. Excellent troll-pic by the way. A long list of fallacies hiding a fallacious implication (that all arguments against communism are fallacious). Bravo!

>>2336089
I was talking about the Seasteading one.

>>2336089
The trouble with communism is in application, not in theory. People without fail take their hands off the reins and let someone else handle their thinking for them, which invariably results in corruption. Plus, the discouragement of competition is bad. It's like evolution only you take natural selection out of the equation and everyone gets to live.

The distinction between socialism and communism is very important. Drifting toward more socialism for the purposes of assurance of personal well being is a good thing. The discouragement of economic advancement isn't.

>>2336089
>>2336104
>I would assert that ignoring history is irrational.
Stalin did awful things. Stalin said he was a communist. So all communists are like Stalin. Communism is stalinism and statism.

But let's not turn this thread into a /new/ circlejerk

>>2336118
You're putting words in his mouth, bro. You're better than that. He was talking about how every application of communism has been terrible for the economy and personal freedom.

>>2336118

Fuck this thread...
everybody whinning because some junkie was arrested
there are far more absurd things happening

>>2336124
Communism does not have to be a negative for personal freedom. He implied because previous forms of communism have been like that that communism will be like that. Unless I understood it incorrectly. And I will bring up that communism turned the USSR into a superpower quickly.

>>2336078
Nah man, I'm not a tea partier and I don't buy into Fox. My ideal society would be an anarcho-capitalist society that through private courts, market action, and private defense agencies creates a legal system based on what people want/need rather than the threat of government action.

That is my IDEAL. Practically speaking, I'm politically moderate and would be more likely to vote democrat than republican if only because I value personal freedom more than economic freedom.

>>2336135
My problem is that anarchism quickly devolves into a dictatorship.

>>2336143
... as does communism.

>>2336133
I'll give you personal freedom, but capitalism wins against communism for economic efficiency without fail. It's a simple matter of competition. The only lateral you have while still maintaining a resonably efficient economy is the everything to the left of the "no tax capitalism" model and everything to the right of "100% equal distribution of wages model".

So in the end you're just weighing economic incentive for success against personal well being. In my opinion, the best model is one where no matter what you get rations and shelter, but in order to get money you have to get a job. All children are aborted unless you can prove that you can support them.

>>2336143
What makes you say that?

>>2336133

Nazism does not have to be a negative for personal freedom. He implied because previous forms of Nazism have been like that that Nazism will be like that. Unless I understood it incorrectly. And I will bring up that Nazism turned Germany into a superpower quickly.

I apologise for the Godwin, but for fucks sake, your argument makes practically any empirical criticism of a political system impossible.

>OK, communism has been shit the last 100 times we tried it, but maybe this time it will work! I'm going to hideously abuse the argument that correlation implies causation in a way that would make even David Hume feel uncomfortable

>>2336143
Aren't you doing what you mock critics of communism for? You see in a truly anarchocapitalist society you get yourself a Private Defense Agency. The motive for aggression is questionable, because offensive weaponry and invasion costs a lot. In some bizzare situation where the PDA did become offensive then its competition would have market based motives to expose this buildup. The private courts and investors, shocked at the attempt at aggression, denounce the company. It loses all of its power because that power comes from people buying into it and trusting it to defend them. The private courts may even have the banks freeze the companies assets if it gets too out of control.

>>2336151
I'm not advocating communism as a replacement. I'm just pissed when shitbrains start going OMFG COMMUNISZMKFMDKM

>>2336153
> In my opinion, the best model is one where no matter what you get rations and shelter, but in order to get money you have to get a job.
I think that is an excellent balance between socializiation and capitalism. Right to life (in this case meaning active supply rather than passive non-interference), but no right to luxury.
>All children are aborted unless you can prove that you can support them.
God DAMN dude. Not even CHINA did this. How about kicking that rule in after 2 kids?

>>2336163
There are many different types of communism which have not been tried. That is what I am saying. Who knows, perhaps there is a type of Nazism that would work splendidly.
>>2336164
*sigh* I didn't want this to become a shitstorm like /new/

>>2336165
Agreed. But if you and I were founding a nation, I would have to seriously re-evaluate my relationship with a person who actually advocated adopting that system for a large nation.

>>2336172
I'm not founding my nation on communism.

>>2336171
Dude you posted politics stuff, sorry for talking about politics.

>>2336171
>implying that was a shitstorm and not a polite explanation of one's political views

>>2336181
I know. He keeps saying "let's not start a political debate" and then posting politically provocative pics. LOL

>>2336179
Look, based on your dismissal of anarchism, I don't think you understand what it means.

Anarchy =/= chaos, or a free-for-all, or pro-violence, or any of that shit. Any conceivable anarchist society would be fairly organized, and based on a strong policy of mutualism.

No masters, no slaves, care for your fellow human being, and, above all, freedom to live.

>>2336181
>>2336190
I am DUMPING A FOLDER, you dumb shits.
>>2336185
I just don't want a political discussion right now. What usually happens is I explain my views and opinions and then AHIFSJNFJDNFIUHDKFSNDJFN happens in the thread. I'm just not up for it right now, sorry man

>>2336168
Yeah, well. That would be why it's an ideal, not a system that would be feasibly acceptable to the general population. The idea, though, is that children are your responsibility. If they were to be born, they would have the right to food and shelter. However, that shouldn't mean that you can purposefully or accidentally bring about avoidable cost to the taxpayers.

So, government mandated abortions for the unemployed or those unable to pay. Shouldn't be a problem for two parents, even at a low paying job, to pay for one or two kids. I think in a two parent household there would be a lower "kid cost threshold" too, so if there are two parents they have the ability to potentially receive a certain amount of government aid for the feeding and housing of an unborn child.

To discourage not reporting a pregnancy when you know that you can't support the child, all children whose existence was not reported to the government will be taken away. Unfortunately, this system hinges on people seeing the lack of "wrong-ness" in an abortion.

In summary, if you exist you get welfare. Avoidable people don't.

>>2336196
>No masters, no slaves, care for your fellow human being, and, above all, freedom to live.
I would love for such a system to exist, it's just that I know enough people that would fuck it up because of completely different beliefs and ideologies that I don't see it as a viable alternative until humanity becomes more mature.

>>2336197
Well you seem to be a standard liberal. Despite being opposed to the ideology, I understand your reasons and agree with plenty of these pictures. I don't know about everyone else, but I think /sci/ is intelligent enough for rational discourse.

>>2336171

>There are many different types of communism which have not been tried. That is what I am saying. Who knows, perhaps there is a type of Nazism that would work splendidly.

Perhaps. But I find it hard to justify risking another few hundred years of world wars and holocausts until we find one that works. Likewise, I do not see how one can justify supporting a system that has fucked up every country to try it just in case it might work one day.

>>2336216
I completely agree with you.

>>2336207
The free rider argument isn't really a problem for anarchy. There have always been people trying to mess things up. The American revolution is a good example, many people did nothing to help or took action to stop the revolution, yet directly benefited from it after. Thing is, so did the Americans. You can have social change that helps everyone that is only done by some.

>>2335587
Want to know something cool and useless? Your call your America folder "AMERIKKA", which coincidentally happens to be Finnish for America. I'm not shitting you. I know the joke, 'murica, etc. Now continue your image dumping.

>>2336223
My issue is that there may be a greater amount of, well, dumber people that would want to institute a different people and perhaps create their own bloody revolution. However if you manage to do it, kudos to you. I may even try to apply for citizenship.

>>2335941
I'm a gun owner that isn't a conservative. Is this strange?

>>2336223
>The free rider argument isn't really a problem for anarchy.
Orly?

If taxes aren't mandated, then those who contribute to things with global benefit are having their blood leeched by those who don't contribute. This includes roads, water, sanitation, public education, etc. How exactly does a system with no disincentive to parasitism remain relatively free from parasites?

Lynch-mobs and extreme social pressure might work. But you see where I'm going. I'd rather pay taxes.

>>2336234
No, you just think it is because of the simplistic left right spectrum.

>>2336207
No, you're right, most people today would not be able to live in such a society.

But you speak of humanity maturing. A person's beliefs and values and ideologies etc. are largely (perhaps even entirely) a product of the society they live in. For there to be any hope for our species to survive, we must create a society that nurtures and encourages the ideals we seek in others.

I imagine there existing an small anarchist community, consisting of a few like-minded individuals. Through education demonstrations, this community will grow, and as if does, more and more people will have the qualities we so desperately need.

>>2336231
>would want to institute a different people
What the fuck, *different system
>>2336240
>But you speak of humanity maturing. A person's beliefs and values and ideologies etc. are largely (perhaps even entirely) a product of the society they live in. For there to be any hope for our species to survive, we must create a society that nurtures and encourages the ideals we seek in others.
thatswhati'mtalkingabout.jpg

>>2336237 so what? If big corporation needs to get from point A to point B then they pay to have a road. So some people that didn't contribute to the road use the road? That doesn't create an ENORMOUS problem. Now, your solution of taxation doesn't allow any choice. If we have the system based on the market we ensure we are getting the services we need at the fairest price, while with taxation we are paying for WHATEVER the government wants to do.

>>2336240
Only small communities have the coherent social accountability to make anarchism feasible. Once you're in a population big enough where the fraction of people who know you is small, parasitism and greed will destabilize it.

Really, try a thought experiment with a small perturbation on an anarchist society. Almost all of them are the angels you wish we all were, but a small percentage are assholes. What will stop them from subverting a society with no organization, and becoming robber barons? Or warlords?

>>2336246
Let's put it this way: What percentage of their income (or resources, if you're abolished money for some retarded reason) do you think most people will willingly donate to public infrastructure? And what percentage will opt to pay little or nothing?

The answers change whether the system collapses or not.

>>2336245

>>2336249
>>2336249
Robbers are insurance liabilities, no one would want to deal with them, they'd be killed by private defense organizations, the banks would freeze their assets, community militias would hunt them down. The government isn't the only way to stop crime, and there can be order in anarchy.

>>2336256
The Mafia.

Also, Somalia.

>>2336256
>they'd be killed by private defense organizations, the banks would freeze their assets, community militias would hunt them down.
This is a very scary insight. What if the anarchic community have a similar view on let's say, someone with a position or ideology that conflicts with the majority? Who will create moderating rules to stop any quashing of beliefs and separate ideals?

>>2336254
People are learning creatures. They'll pay for the services they need eventually, and if they don't they'll be doomed. The majority doesn't even have to do it, there are free market motives for corporations to provide for a basic functional society.

>>2336264
I don't get it. You have anarchy AND corporations?

>>2336262

>>2336262
Most regions of an anarchy based world would have libertarian laws, or at least eliminate victim less crimes. People are (in a complex way) going to pay for the laws they want. You will pay for the law that helps you, and generally people want to do whatever they want so they would buy into a system that creates a society that allows for a lot of individual freedom. Sure, human rights violations and abuse is possible, but that is a problem for all systems and has no real motivation in an anarchocapitalist society.

>>2336268
Yes. Anarchocapitalism.

>>2336275
Ehhh I dunno, I just have concerns that a bunch of corporations will band together and successfully cause corruption throughout much of the anarchic system and successfully price gouge.

>>2336258
I've already explained why I don't think PDAs would become mafia-like. I don't mean that in a condescending way, I genuinely intend to inform you to look for my earlier post on that subject.

>>2336281
OK, so now we have feudalism and robber barons.

>>2336285
Whoops forgot my pic

>>2336292
You mean this reason?
>>2336292
>Robbers are insurance liabilities, no one would want to deal with them, they'd be killed by private defense organizations, the banks would freeze their assets, community militias would hunt them down. The government isn't the only way to stop crime, and there can be order in anarchy.

Why didn't this stop the Mafia in the first place?

>>2336285
That would cost more than it would help. Corporations compete, if they all banded together there would be too much sharing of profit. There would always be enough corporations to benefit from stopping corruption. If my company exposes corruption in my competition I can hurt my competition because people will no longer want to pay for the corrupt services.

>>2336300
Actually no, not that one.
This one:
>>2336164

>>2336302
Ehh, maybe, but what you describe sounds less like anarcho-capitalism and a bit more like minarchism to me.

>>2336264
There's still a lot of issues to be resolved. If a corporation builds a bridge and puts a toll on it, can that toll be $100? If you don't like it, get another corporation to build another bridge? What about the situations where a corporation takes possession of a unique space or commodity?

Well, the private courts would have the banks freeze their assets, and the banks would own the bridge? That seems more like a selfish solution than a fair one. What does the next corporation do when a bridge needs to be built?

How is land owned? Without the military protection of the economic exchange of land, we just devolve into the military exchange of land. I'm not seeing how this can work without universal authoritative decision making by bodies who have the interests of the people in mind.

>>2336298

Sorry, what was that? We cannot hear you from the moon.

Countries that lack the technological advancement to send men to the moon are very primitive.

>>2336295
You can make any system sound evil when you put that kind of spin on it. I think you're reducing things to be a tad bit more simple than they are.

>>2336302
No. Competition is upheld by governmental laws against monopolization. Without it, economies tend toward monopolies owned by conglomerates.

>>2336319
I'm dumping a goddamn folder

Also a small deviation from my dump

>>2336335

>>2336315
There is no reason to make prices that high. You wind up having only a few people 'cross your bridge'. You make more money if a lot of people pay a cheap toll than if a small number of people pay an insane toll. There will still be people crossing your bridge, but you really lose the middle to low income people who would otherwise make up the majority of bridge travel.

>>2336344

>>2336347
>You make more money if a lot of people pay a cheap toll than if a small number of people pay an insane toll.

>paying a toll in the first place
I'm not liking this system

>>2336358
Forgot pic AGAIN

>>2336361

>>2336358
Why not? If you dont pay that corporation money for building you a bridge 1.They are working without compensation and 2.they wont be able to build you more bridges.

>>2336347
Ah, but that only holds so long as there's not a monopoly. If we've got an insurmountable river and a corporation invests to make a bridge, they're the only timely method for getting across that river. The only reason they'd create the bridge is because of a great economic need for people to cross the river. If the corporation raises the prices over time, there's nothing anyone can do about it. They've got a monopoly until there's an alternative competing bridge.

So does another corporation invest in a new bridge to compete with the other bridge? If the capacity of the old bridge is within the bound of the people crossing it, then that possibly necessary second bridge results in an economic efficiency of under 50%.

The point here being that sometimes competition isn't the most efficient option, but is the necessary one for the advancement of a society when there's a lack of an authoritative governing body.

>>2336326
I'd rather not give you a wall of text, here is a link explaining the argument against that notion.
http://www.proudprofiteer.com/2010/09/monopoly-pdas-would-not-form-in-a-stateless-society/

>>2336373
Or, you know, I'd rather a libertarian government with robots and their own manufacturing facilities to build immaculate solar roads for free

>>2336388
Talking about the monopolization of resources and products, not defense.

>>2336394

>>2336380
I think a society willing to free itself from government would be different enough from the current one that it would understand the occasional need to self sacrifice. After enough social change there may even be ethical market participants or individuals devoted to the occasional charitable bridge. Maybe they will be hurt by building a second bridge, but there will be at least one man out of billions who sees the moral imperative.

>>2336403

>>2336407
example of a benevolent private entity: wikipedia.

>>2336409

>>2336417
Not-for-profit organization, just to pay wages and keep themselves afloat. and they are very few people, with the benefit of being one of the most popular websites in the world.

>>2336407
I suppose that you could rely on many many people spending money on building a bridge (maybe 100,000 spending 100 dollars for something golden-gate sized) and that the organization running that bridge would be fair in its tolls(maybe that would pay dividends to the contributors and make the contributors exempt from tolls). Given that, though, there's still the question of the ownership of rights to build. If a corporation claims some land for a toll road, can someone else build a road right next to it? And someone else? Can corporations claim unclaimed land for themselves and do whatever they want with them?

Where's the market-driven incentive for the zoning of land for corporate or residential needs? At what point when we run out of space is something deemed useless, and by what convention is the land the useless construction is on seized from the owner? And how would that be the result of personal defense agencies?

>>2336424
Not for profit is still a non-government entity working through people giving money to a cause they believe in. If we needed government to do good than charity wouldn't exist. A species that can not be ethical most of the time without the existence of government threats of aggression does not even deserve to thrive.

>>2336424
>>2336436
>I suppose that you could rely on many many people spending money on building a bridge (maybe 100,000 spending 100 dollars for something golden-gate sized) and that the organization running that bridge would be fair in its tolls(maybe that would pay dividends to the contributors and make the contributors exempt from tolls).
That actually sounds pretty good

>>2336440
My bottom line is anarchism on country or international scales cannot work in today's world.

Still waiting on how anarcho-capitalism doesn't result in the monopolies in situations where the barrier-to-entry is great. Also wondering how collusion is somehow expected not to occur in an economy where it is not outlawed.

>>2336442

>>2336436
property rights can exist through things like contracts. The base of this society is contractual action, as in things are only done with the consent of parties involved. You've certainly found a problem, but I believe if given the proper time I could think of a way to solve that.

>>2336450
Here is a special one for enraging /sci/'s American uni students

>>2336447
You do know that this is just one guy right? I'm doing the best I can to explain my beliefs and it takes a bit of time to address every single concern that has been brought up.

>>2336467

>>2336472

>>2336472
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_foreign-born_population_in_2005

Other things where the United States is #1

Funny, if the US sucks so bad, why do so many people want to move to the US?

>>2336479
Funny, if you think you're so smart then why are you putting words into my mouth? And not noticing I'M DUMPING A GODDAMN FOLDER FUCK

>>2336486

>>2336447
As someone who has never studied economics on a professional level I'm going to have to suggest you ask someone with a bit more knowledge on this, as I'm sure I'll be looking into that problem too. I really do mean that though, I encourage you to do some reading on the topic and hope you find the answers to those questions.

>>2336491

>>2336496
Meanwhile, on /new/

Inurdaes is a bad man. He often uses deception as part of his propaganda. He does not care about honestly looking at things and will ignore and distort facts if they don't agree with him and he thinks he can get away with it.

This man is not your friend. He fights to misinform you.

>>2336498
Hello Mr. Beck, how are you today? I wish you a good day and a healthy life.

Thanks for the pics op, and thanks everyone for a damn near civil conversation on 4chan. I've gotta go, but I'm glad that I had the opportunity to answers some questions and point some people in the right direction.

>>2336479

You have a massive border with a huge third-world country and lax immigration control. That can't be said about any other Western country. It's not about the US being more desirable, it's about the US being the easiest option.

>>2336504
America can't even feed it's own population, how fucking disgraceful

>>2336514

>>2336518

>>2336524

>>2336531
No food? SOLUTION

ITT: butthurt eurofags with an inferiority complex

pic related its an american spaceship

>>2336453
From your talk about private courts and personal defense agencies, let's walk through how a system would come about for zoning land.(starting from a bunch of people with nothing built in an undeveloped area)

First off, "military" seizing of land. Not much real gunfire is necessary, but a lot of posturing happens. If someone's crazy enough to get into a situation where's he's going to lose, he'll die. Assuming rational people, the amount of area each group gets is the amount they can hold.

Then, once territory is established, people start working while protected by their gun-wielding friends. This happens relatively fast because they have a "farm in a box" or something. Point is there are producers protected by infantry. Eventually, production gets going and people have actual things of value.

So, essentially what we've got here is defense agencies who own land leasing it out to people who produce from it. Add in some construction of living quarters and some more production buildings and we've got lots of real estate protected by private agencies.

Now, here's where the globalization happens. People set up trade "caravans" to go to other territories and trade goods. These goods are owned by the producers from land "owned" by the defenders. Each territory engages in communication and the relationship is generally friendly, if tense. It's almost like government, but not quite. The individual defense organizations can, if they want, seize whatever goods they want from their own producers. However, the general goal is for economic prosperity. The more a group trades, the more they prosper, so the groups get closer and closer in relation.

wtf is going on in this thread. this is not science

go the fuck /new/!

SAGE

>>2336550
(cont)
Eventually, people have enough goods to potentially buy land from other organizations if they don't have enough. The goods are given to the defense organizations and the land is used for production purposes. Deals going bad result in bad trade relations for the party at fault, so there's some amount of accountability. Over time, the defense organizations become more contractors than land owners, and the lines between the different groups blur. Homogenization happens assuming rational parties, and we have producers paying defense organizations to protect their property, with the defense organizations policing each other too.
Courts are made to settle disputes and banks are made to store the most universally accepted, durable, and limited currency. The banks also loan it out so as to encourage expansion.

So, from my perspective, the original land owners will end up being the defense organizations. However, over time people who NEED the land instead of the people who have the ability to protect the land are the ones who will end up owning the land by buying it from the defense organizations. The courts will keep records of contractual agreements which will be backed by the defense organizations.

>>2336537
>>2336546
Protip: The world doesn't consist of North America and Europe

>>2336554
(cont)
So what happens if someone owns land that isn't useful to society, but is personally useful enough that he won't sell it? I think it's just a matter of recording a payment of a defense organization to seize the land through the courts. The other organizations won't contest it, and the land becomes yours through use of force backed by use of currency. People who pay defense organizations to seize land in a shady way are considered to have come about the land "illegally" and will be penalized by any organization who accepts the rulings of the private courts who decide that way.

My only issue with it is I still see tremendous opportunity for shady business practices and no incentive for certain economically unquantifiable matters of importance.. What stops a corporation from "buying out" and archaeological dig site through force and building a mall on top of it? Why would a private court whose power comes from the acceptance of its rulings by corporations give any weight to historical importance?

>>2336555
Well this is the end of my AMERIKKA folder, unless anyone wants me to post my /new/ folder which is quite similar.

>>2336555
Yeah, and the retarded kid is "officially" on my baseball team. But really, we just let him wander out in left field somewhere, whether or not we're at bat.

>This dump.

Sometimes you're a pretty cool guy Inurdaes.

>>2336574
:)

>>2336589
I have a lot of those

>>2336602
I bought that Futurama poster today, funnily enough.

>>2336602

>>2336602
RELEASE THE CARGO

>>2336610
Did you buy it online? If so I want to buy that.

>>2336615
>>2336616
I'll post every single one I have

americafag here, i kinda like all the anti american hate here, makes me feel good. only thing i'm patriotic about is our classic cars.

>>2336546

America's space program will be inferior within 50 years.

>>2336626
America's space program is already inferior to what it could be

>>2336629

>>2336641

>>2336546
>pic related its an american spaceship

>>2336645

>>2336618
Just got it from a local book shop, but Amazon has it.
http://www.amazon.com/Futurama-Mindless-Worker-Happy-Poster/dp/B0010SW8FQ

Where do you live by the way?

>>2336651
>>2336654
South Australia. And thanks

>>2336654

>>2336663

>>2336666
ANTICHRIST

>>2336674

>>2336685

I enjoyed this image dump. Knowing other people like me can see the hideous evil in unrestrained jingoism and capitalism gives me a little hope. But I still want to move elsewhere. Maybe then my tax dollars will actually be used for something other than subjugating other countries.

>>2336690

>>2336693
Oohhh Caaaaaaannnnnnnaaaadaaaaa

>>2336696

>>2336709

>>2336723

>>2336728

ITT: People crying about content relevant to the thread, but not talking about content relevant to the thread at the same time. Also an awesome picture dump.

He's got a Ph.D., is it really right to declare him a "danger"? Is he a victim of technicalities and our retarded nation?
I'd dare to answer yes.

>>2336734
>every thread on /int/ and /sp/ ever

>>2336741

>>2336747

>ITT: Inurdaes lost it

>>2336755
mpblublubulf

>>2336757
What do you mean?

>>2336763

>>2336769
Durka durka, mohammad jihad

>>2336769
What are you doing?

>>2336777

>>2336781
Dumping my /new/'s day comic portion of my /new/ folder

>>2336791
Ok, but why?

>>2336798
Because
>>2336602
>>2336615
>>2336616

>>2336805

>>2336805
But /new/ isn't fun, /sci/ is fun!

>>2336815

>>2336824
I'm enjoying the dump. Better than the /b/ raid.

>>2336824
You do realize you're saying that in the middle of a /b/ raid, right?
Besides, despite me hating the majority of posters on /new/ I quite like this comic and its variations.

>>2336705
Technocratic Republic of /sci/ in the Northern Territories go

>>2336874
Too cold. We'll see.

>>2336856
Part of my response isn't allowed to be posted :-(

>>2336907
You could post it in a text file and screencap that

>>2336918

>>2336933

Holy shit I needed this thread so badly. Thanks Inurdaes, I laughed my ass off and it felt great.

>>2336950
:3

Don't feel like reading the whole thread, but felt obliged to respond. Psychology is in no way science. The do not use the scientific method in any way shape or form and the guy did use a lot of drugs. Secondly anyone who has ever worked at a university know the a big part of the defense budget is funding scientific research so that pie chart is misleading at best. Everything from groundwater hydrology to robotics, to vaccine research, all get significant funding from the DOD.

>>2336956
Could some people get this thread archived? I'm not going to dump my AMERIKKA folder and /new/ comics again and would like the ability to link it here.

>>2336970

>>2336976

>>2336981

>>2336994

>>2337004

>>2336897
Underground society dug into permafrost with insulated walls and solar heating, aw yeeee

I got so nauseous from reading it i couldn't go on beyond from when he tried to tell the borderguy "that LSD isn't a narcotic substance".

It was just too disgusting..

This article almost made me feel as nauseous as that popmusic-video with Insane Clown posse.

>>2337022
I would prefer not to live like that, and it would not attract many people
However if you have the expertise you could perhaps help design the Europa habitats when the space program gets up and running

>>2337034

>>2337044

>>2337056

>>2337034
Yeah, I just have a weird fixation with Canada because it's still so unpopulated. Give me a space ship and I'll fix you up with a cool Europa ice-house ASAP!

>>2337056
I'd like to see one of these where they walk straight past each other without saying anything, then one of them posts news on /new/.

Just saw a document with some afghan videos of civilian shootings.

A car with kids inside is shot into a sieve by a gunner in a specter.
The gunner whoops with excitement.
Troops arrive and notice dead kids.
"Their own fault for bringing the kids here"

Feeling sick.

>>2337067
Australia has only ~21 million people, Tasmania is a landmass half the size of Germany with a similar terrain in many places and only has about 500,000 people, concentrated in Hobart, Launceston, and the other northern Tasmanian towns. The temperature ranges between -5'C in winter and 38'C in the summer. I am fucking amazed British settlers didn't take Tasmania immediately and populate it with their own folk.

>>2337064

>>2337097

>>2337072
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kfHn6YKdvsk&feature=related

>>2337104

>>2337119
Last one

>>2337084
I just have a thing for deciduous forest I guess.

Pull some Myst - Channelwood stuff.

>>2337133
I see.

>>2335566
My mom is Swedish so I automatically have EU citizenship and passport. When the tea parters take over im bailing on this shit. U JOLLO?

>>2336959
Those scientific advancements should be done separately, or at least counted as such so we know how much is spent to kill people more efficiently vs. doing regular things more efficiently.

>>2337176
They've already taken over.
Also I'm not to thrilled with the muslim shit that's going on in Malmo at the moment.

>>2337142
nearly a gig of win

>>2337184
Lol

>>2337196
>>2337196

please make an online catalog with all your stuff

I need an organized online place where I can take reaction pictures.

>>2337176
I am as jelly as the accompaniment to my peanut butter.

>>2337204
When I have good net I'll rapidshit my reaction image folder, kay?
I'm off to have a shower. Toodle-oo

>>2337196
/r/ing a torrent for the glory of our empire

>do illegal things
>talk about it over a public medium
>get mad when they bite your ass in the future

I don't see anything wrong here

>>2337142
>29 may 2010

I sad.
Mine 4chan folder was few times delated due to HDD format.

>>2336959
Denying entry to the US based on LSD use is just silly. LSD doesn't have a high potential for abuse nor does it have significant side effects. Many notable scientists have used it. For example, Kary Mullis said that LSD use helped him invent the polymerase chain reaction.

>>2337072
collateral murder rocks!

>>2337276
Assange should pop some LSD

>>2337295
Eyyyyy

>>2337131
Why is that plane climbing at that angle after 5 hours?

>>2337530
It was taken on Jupiter

"Technocratic republic of /sci/" will never happen.

That is all.

>>2337733
Says you

>>2337742
Says any sane person. By the time it might actually be possible for you to do this (if by some chance you happen to come into possession of tens of millions of dollars), /sci/ won't be around, and your priorities will have changed completely. Just give up on it already like a sane person.

>>2337761
Yeah. The best he'll ever do is vote for tech-friendly candidates for office.

America is bad---anarchocapitalism---racism---something about the op-/sci/micronation

Pretty logical progression right?