/sci/ - Science & Math

I really don't care about Zeitgeist beyond The Venus Project. Dear, Zeus, that idealistic, dehumanizing architecture needs to be put down.

>Implying TVP would not be a massive heap of fail without post-scarcity technology.

I have no idea what Zeitgeist is, but I (Australian) support our system.

There is PLENTY of room for improvement. There is plenty wrong with it. But there is also plenty right with it. I strongly believe that our 'system' is among one of the best currently existing and I support it in that I believe that we should be striving to improve it or modify it, not tear it down.

Nothing will ever be perfect.

>>2606538

Well, that goes without saying. Just because something won't be perfect IS NOT EXCUSE TO CEASE INNOVATION. That's like saying, "Well, I started playing this game and I already screwed up the first three - it's not perfect, so I'll give up on trying to better my score."

What kind of logic is that?

1 - I like the aims of the Venus Project, but not all of the methods. Very naive view on how crime should be treated. The shit they're talking about wouldn't be applicable for another 100 years.
2 - n/a
3 - n/a
4 - n/a
5 - Bitch, I'm the main proponent of the TRS. At least I acknowledge we do not have enough support and technology to do it right now.

>>2606557

No shit? Anyway, the excuse of "we can't do it right now" is full of fail. The point is to keep rallying support. Because if you give up, you'll *never reach your goal - it won't even be a possibility.

tl;dr Saying there isn't enough support NOW does not mean there will NEVER be enough support. It's called time.

>>2606549
I was just answering his question. Yes, I defend it because improving it is better than attacking. It may sound 'obvious' but there are plenty of people outright criticizing the system as being outright wrong (whom I have personal experience with, they (two of them) are philosophy majors) and needing to be torn down.

However I think I will just leave this topic now since I really have no idea what Zeitgeist is and would probably just end up making an ass of myself/not really contribute anything.

>>2606563
The level of automation they are talking about is actually NOT possible. There are loads of MTV generation kids now that if there was a full-on movement of normal people trying to do it they'd be a huge drag as 'I don't wanna do it, someone else can, fuck you'

Note that I support it, but I'm waiting for human level AI automation in the capitalistic system to put a absolute fuckton of people out of work. Then a project like that WILL become feasible.

Zeitgeist has some good ideas.

But, seeing as we are all inherently greedy and selfish, and are not willing to compromise our current way of life, and are afraid of change, and will ALWAYS find ways to abuse whatever system we find ourselves in, and could not choose the right people to implement these changes, this will never happen.

I really really hope for a Technocratic society though.

>>2606577
by the time human level ai exists, a technological singularity will be triggered shortly thereafter, making any plans for a trs to be quite pointless.

>>2606600

I'm all about eugenics. I think that a system that would forbid people under a certain amount of intelligence (refraining from using IQ, but it's still a good indicator) or people who have genetic diseases to have offspring. To handle overpopulation, force a maximum of two children per couple limit (if divorced, those people can't have any more). if some couples decide not to have children then it would be possible to allow other couples, with better genes, to have more offspring.

As for ressource allocation.

1) Education
2) Health
3) Research
4) ????

Communism? Communism. I don't know enough about the possibility of a self sufficient nation, but if possible, an internal allocation of ressources with a point system per person for rations + an amount that can only be spent on essentials.

>>2606603
Why would China like your little mind-wank, teenager?

>>2606643
It's referring to the joke that China will rape Australia as soon as it feels the need to. Can't say I disagree.

>>2606603
>those glasses

>>2606730
Long live the university!

>>2606520
Any economic system without some degree of competition for reward, aka some level of capitalism, is retarded and non-functional.

>>2606741
what did five fingers say to the face?

SMAC

i don't belive in it couse it's the same faggots talking about the shit in each doc they make.

and they act like knowitall douche bags

>1. If you do not like Zeitgeist, is it because you do like the system we have now and defend it?
I do not like Zeitgeist but that is not why. It's because Zeitgeist presents lies as fact.

>2. If question 1 applies, why do you support our system?
I don't.

>3. If question doesn't apply, is it because you are scared of change?
No, I embrace change.

>4. If 3...
N/A

>5. Lastly, if you do not agree with the system, have you stopped to take the time and rationalize it?
I don't like the system because it could be so much better. However, it is the best system we have developed to date, as you can see by the rising standard of living throughout history. I believe any improvements should be evolutionary - we shouldn't destroy the system, but rather improve it. I believe this is happening, but slowly. I would prefer it happen slowly, so the world can adapt to the change instead of breaking. Does that answer your question?

This webpage explains how inaccurate Zeitgeist is:
http://conspiracyscience.com/articles/zeitgeist/

The chief question answered by a free market is WHAT to PRODUCE and HOW? When there is no market for capital goods (let alone consumer goods), real prices disappear and the question becomes nearly impossible to answer.

Yes, you will have to show me some fucking algorithms before I consider trying robot communism to be a good idea.

Fucking hipsters. Just get your philosophy degrees, make me good coffee at Starbucks, and I'll fix the world.

>>2606779
>However, it is the best system we have developed to date
>Are you trolling or did you missed your history classes?

I don't like zeitgeist because the people who do like it are usually crazier than.

as long as humans exist, there will be sufferin, hunger, injustice, all the bad, terrible things you can imagine, why do you want to help humanity? why do you want to help something bad, an illness, because thats what humanity is, an sickness wich needs to be cured and the cure is to kill all humans and destroy the earth so the process of evolution can not happen again (atleast in our planet, thats all we could do), were in year 2011, to get here billions and billions of people had to die, suffer and experience horrible things, i can understand if you have a nice life that you enjoy but you also must know that for each happy person in the world theres a lot sufferin and in a bad situation, the earth is now a better place than it was 100, 1000, 10000 years ago and could probably keep getting better, but its a very slow process and all the things jasque fresco and project venus says, will be very hard to obtain and even if it happens it will be in a long long time, the only logic, rational, the good thing to do, is to destroy the earth, think about it.

I'll preface my rebuttal by saying that I very much look forward to a Zeitgeitesque future, transhumanism, life extension and all the technological advancements needed for them so, obviously, I am not afraid of change, however...

1)Energy technology isn't there yet.
Even with advances in renewable energies, you still need room temp superconductivity to delocalize the power plants in to one location that can be distributed to the rest of the world. That alone is what will solve the never-ending game for energy that prevents most of the world from coming in to the first world, and the rest of the world from developing new, efficient technologies that rely on such energy, like intercontinental rail, transatlantic rail, cities without power stations or power lines, etc.

2) Robotics isn't there yet.
Because battery/wireless power technology isn't there yet. But it might be there very soon.

3) AI is laughably far away from what Zeitgeist proposes.
This shouldn't require any explanation. It's well known in the IT community that software is far behind hardware tech in terms of speed of computing - and digital AI will inevitably require a whole boatload of it. Sure, "Watson" fills up a whole server room now and might be handheld in 10 years, but Watson is a far cry from actual AI, we aren't any closer to actual AI right now than we are to superconducters - both will require a breakthrough that no one can see coming because we don't understand them well enough yet. It could be 10 years or 50 years or even never.

Continued...

rich people: LOL? THE WORLD IS FINE L2LIFE HAHAH LAZY WELFARE? HAHAH LOL CRY BABY

stay classy ignorantfags

>>2606864
Continued:

I could say more but that'll do I think. Because I don't want to end on a sour note, I will say that I still think we have a bright future to look forward to that will be driven by technologies in life extension, transhumanism, energy, space exploration etc that will change society. Almost none of them are here yet, but some of them are both inevitable and so close I can smell them; aside from the obvious advancements in semiconductors industry that will continue as they have been, the biggest advancements that you can bank on in the near future will be in biotechnology. Biotech combined with peak oil and the human population growth coming to a halt will be the biggest movers and shakers over the next 30 years, for better or worse; 2040 will be a completely different world because of these three things.

>>2606859
You should go to bed son, it's late

>Zeitgeist
This needs to be an autoban word. Holy shit.

im bumping this thread and no one can stop me

>>2606520
OP, you are better off going to their forums or something, you wont find what you are looking for here

>>2606870
>the biggest advancements that you can bank on in the near future will be in biotechnology. Biotech combined with peak oil and the human population growth coming to a halt will be the biggest movers and shakers over the next 30 years, for better or worse; 2040 will be a completely different world because of these three things.

Are you me? Like, seriously, I have never heard these ideas expressed like this before, except when it has been me expressing them.