/sci/ - Science & Math

bump

Having just graduated with a non-science related degree I'm personally thinking about going back to school and doing engineering to get into the prosthetic design industry.
Still need to examine the field a it more, though.

One negative I see with mass-prosthetic use, though, is that it'd take away a lot from people who have worked hard to be strong and fast, people who have dedicated their lives to be a cut above your average nerd.

I myself am trying to get oriented to enter the field of biomedical engineering.

I want to study and see if organic-synthetic electroactive polymers (like cellulose or rayon doped with SWNTs) can merge in some way with nervous tissue.

I want to create the skeleto-muscular anatomy for the first artificial body.

>>2611886
>is that it'd take away a lot from people who have worked hard to be strong and fast,

Oh boy how about that fast runner guys, he's sure done been productive in his life time... oh wait no actually he's been running in circles for the past 30 years.

It's not going to happen.

Rich people are what fund science. No funding, no science. Rich people will never fund the tools of their own disempowerment. If it is a technology that will totally nullify economics you can be reasonably sure that they would have a vested interest in preventing that tech from being developed.

We also have to take a look at the rational likelihood that nanotech and human level AI could just be science fiction, and that we'll have to fend for ourselves like normal for the foreseeable future.

>>2611966
>Implying rich people wouldn't spend money to extend their lifetime

This is why it WILL get funding.

>>2611915

Oh how about that scientist, guys? Been running around in the halls of academia for decades licking boot and hoping to get some recognition or the legendary tenure!

What a sap!

Please. Our lives have no objective value that is based on what we spend our lives doing. They're equally worthless.

>>2611974

Unleashing immortality on the majority of the human species is the best way to ensure the species' demise. If they have any sense it won't be made common.

>>2611981
That is true EXCEPT when it comes to the opportunity to transcend the human experience.

>>2611886
One mans accomplishment does not diminish another's any more than lighting a second candle takes light away from the first.

How can you deny the drive to excel because you're afraid of hurting other people's self-esteem? That's a really pernicious mind-set. Choosing to be mediocre doesn't serve anyone.

FFFFFFFUUUUUU-

I just went to Dresden Codak and I was ten seconds away from posting this and the song >:(

Okay, so say I get cool cyborg arms and legs. Will I then not need to eat as much as I do now? How much nutrients/calories do legs and arms require?

>>2612004
Depends on the power source. It will either be something that need to be replenished manually, or it will feed of blood glucose just like you do. Earlier models will definitely be the former. The latter is much, much more advanced.

>>2611990

I wonder if that's what the people who came up with this 3D craze think of themselves.

>>2611997
It's not choosing to be mediocre, it's choosing to be human. To earn something with your own physical strength. To use what god gave you.

It's retarded. But it's what people think. People hate the idea of adding machines to them because they don't understand computers or how they work, which scares them, which is why they don't want it in their bodies. I tell my friends about how we could do all this and it creeps them out. they say "Oh sure, you can go ahead and get the implants and then they'll control you. no thanks"

TL;DR you're all ignoring the fact that most people fear technology and consider their bodies literally sacred. Some people won't even go under the knife and you think people will just accept cyborgs like that? With all the fucking terminator movies?

>>2611989
The human race will die if we don't change. The greatest technologies come from necessity, and I'd say it's the right time for a fundamental change in technology. Keeping technology back for fear of social change is disgusting and pathetic. At the heart of every social problem is an engineering problem.

>>2612025
>It's not choosing to be mediocre, it's choosing to be human. To earn something with your own physical strength. To use what god gave you.
I know it's not you I'm arguing with, but here's the counter:
If "god" gave my physical strength, he also gave me mental acuity. How DARE anyone tell me not to use it?

>>2612025
>TL;DR you're all ignoring the fact that most people fear technology and consider their bodies literally sacred. Some people won't even go under the knife and you think people will just accept cyborgs like that? With all the fucking terminator movies?

People won't use invasive procedures for enhancement until it's something like modern dentistry: Safe, effective, and cosmetically pleasing.

Besides, you can go a long way with non-invasive technology.

>>2612025
I understand that some people like their own bodies and want to keep them natural. But technology is created with our own merits too. Think about how many people can't survive without their smart phone. We ARE what we build and design. Our technology has as much of a right to be in our bodies as our DNA does.

>>2612029

1. 99% of all species that have ever existed have bit the dust.

2. CEO's don't care about the next generation. They only care about what they get, now. There's an afterlife waiting for them anyway, why save what they consider a fallen world in their minds?

3. If what you're saying is true then we should expect to have america's broadband capabilities brought up to the rest of the world's standards/ Yep... any day now... the corporations will act in the greater public good... yep... any day now...

>>2612025
>It's retarded. But it's what people think. People hate the idea of adding machines to them because they don't understand computers or how they work, which scares them, which is why they don't want it in their bodies.
One part of them says this, but the other part is using a smartphone to check their Facebook page.

These changes will occur because they WANT them. Three steps ahead looks alien and disconcerting, but the next step is always shiny, desirable and exciting.

>>2612051
>Three steps ahead looks alien and disconcerting, but the next step is always shiny, desirable and exciting.
This. People a hundred years ago would have found descriptions of today's world simultaneously incredibly amazing and horrifyingly disconcerting.

>>2612044
You don't think a profit could be made of something that has almost 100% demand? Plus, all it would take is one leak, one stolen email, and the world would revolt. People would be pretty unhappy if someone hid immortality from the masses. You can't really hide something that big from the internet now. It would eventually get out. You can't hold back technological progress. You can regulate it, slow it down, but we eventually break through.

>>2612033

You suck at the christian mindset. They don't rebel against god, and since god made them perfect in his image, it might be blasphemous to say that we can do better.

>>2612042

I know that's what you think. It's what i think. But people refuse to be rational. You really think that a species that favors 3D movies over good stories actually has any idea of what's good for it? Yeah, people have cellphones, but to put that in their head, well just look at this post >>2611969 He talks about the annoyance and the lack of "freedom" that a cellphone has. Most people acknowledge that, but since they can just shut it off or leave it at home, they live with it. But if you put it in their heads? it wouldn't matter what the facts were, people wouldn't be bothered to learn them. They would hear some propaganda about a government plot to mind control everyone using the devices and they'd take a massive hit to sales. Shit, people might turn violent against people with augmentations.

We simply cannot expect everyone to be as level headed about all of this as we are. Making the technology will be the easy part. Getting people to accept it with all their biases against science and tech will be the monumental challenge.

>>2612044
Broadband is a natural monopoly. It is a glaring hole - the market there is not free. It should either be FORCED to be a free market, or it should become a municipal utility, like water and power.

>>2612083
>evolution
Them crazy christians.

>>2612080

That's the terrifying thing, isn't it? No matter the repercussions, no matter how bad and bloody the wars or overcrowding, the people will want what suits them regardless of consequences.

People like that... it'd be terrible if they could live forever.

>>2612083
>Getting people to accept it with all their biases against science and tech will be the monumental challenge.
IMO, it will happen almost without effort. Was it hard to convince people to buy cellphones?

>>2612093
>People like that... it'd be terrible if they could live forever.
I'm a little confused as to the details of your scenario. What "people" are getting the immortality tech?
Oh, and "immortality" is a misnomer. Indefinite lifespan is not invulnerability, nor omnipotence.

>>2612100

No. Because you didn't have to put a foreign object in your body. It bugs people. It makes them feel like they're losing control or something.

William Shatner does not want to die. As public awareness rises, many others will follow.

This is why we will have the cure for aging, and not only that, but available eventually to all the people on Earth. In our lifetime.

Fapping to dresden codak in a transhumanist world would be the norm.

>>2612093
I think it's fantastic. Our curiosity literally has no bounds. Every convenience of modern life has more to do with wants than needs. Needs are for animals. We push as far as it will go. That's amazing.

The fact is that you can't decently expect that the society will stay the same when people can't die.
There would be amazing changes, and I could bet that a vast majority can't take it.

>>2612109
That's a kind of near-sightedness that completely goes away when the time comes. Are people afraid of dental work because it is "unnatural"?

Besides, we're quite a way from useful technologies that REQUIRE invasive procedures for healthy humans. Treating disease or disability is another matter (pacemakers, artificial hearts, artificial limbs and joints, etc.)

>>2612093
>Peoples become """immortals""".
>After fifty years, they (finally)learn to think long-term.
>Environment laws everywhere.
>Terraformation projects everywhere.
>World unity achieved in less than a century.
>Science funding (well, at this point, allocation of ressources) skyrocket.

That, or eternal theocracies everywhere.

>>2612119
And we wiped out the Neandertals as well. It might not have been aggressive or malicious, but in the end they simply stopped existing, except for the ones that interbred with us.

>>2612115

If you're going to cure death, for the interest of everyone alive, please first cure the fact that each of us likes privacy, the fact that each of us needs food or water every few days, and the fact that we have a drive to reproduce.

Otherwise it will only make the world worse.

Inb4 magically space colonization also within our lifetimes. That's a no-go.

>>2612117
Eh, that's a shitty comic. It mocks teenagers who fap to transhumanism, but it doesn't not attack the ideal.

To be human is to transcend your former knowledge, your former status. And everyone who does not meet that standard of continual rising excellence will fade away.

>>2612134
>but it doesn't attack the ideal.
fix'd

>>2612128
>please first cure the fact that each of us likes privacy
Clarify this please?
>the fact that each of us needs food or water every few days
Whaddya know, the cure for aging comes around the same time as human-level AI robots.
>and the fact that we have a drive to reproduce.
Producing babies is a choice. If you wish to get the cure for aging, there is mandatory sterilization involved.

>>2612126

>People become immortals
>People are still born at a rate of 358,192 people per day.
>50 years later
>Everyone died from starvation. Immortality just made the suffering longer. Every time people argued for space travel, politicians diverted money to feeding people, as it was what people wanted more.

Oh, good work.

>>2611902
You are all missing the most beneficial gain in this endeavor: the further ordering of conscious phenomena. To take our own consciousness, and experience a perception beyond what has never been experienced in the lifetime of our planet. Moreso, all that we see around us in human society is the literal manifestation of somebody's thought. Your desk is a manifested concept. Your shoes are a manifested concept. With the advent of technology, in lieu of the concept of creating an artificial body,

Mankind will have the capacity to merge with a manifestation of its own thought.


Say that to yourself out loud, and really think of its implications.

>>2612117
Apparently computers would be unable to help design and develop cheap decentralised power generators for the 30% who now lack electricity?

>>2612128
What's wrong with privacy? Transhumanism is a choice, you can't brainwash everyone to fit your emotional standards.

>>2612146
You don't seem to know how birthrates work.
http://www.gapminder.org/videos/what-stops-population-growth/

>>2612150
It already has. And the "third world" isn't doing nearly as badly as you might think. Most people have a world-view that is 50 years out of date.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jbkSRLYSojo
http://www.ted.com/talks/hans_rosling_on_global_population_growth.html

>>2612140

>Clarify this please?
Would you be willing to spend the rest of your natural life with no more living space than at most two cubic meters? With overpopulation due to people just not dying as often, every city will look like Kowloon.

>Whaddya know, the cure for aging comes around the same time as human-level AI robots.

Great. Where are you putting the farms now that real estate is going to all the people? in the rainforests? hope not.

>Producing babies is a choice. If you wish to get the cure for aging, there is mandatory sterilization involved.

Ho ho ho ho, totalitarianism will solve everything!

>>2612162
And by saying that, I mean that great progress is being made. I don't want to dismiss the issue of poverty, especially in Africa. It needs addressing. But it's not all bad news.
http://www.foreignpolicy.com/articles/2010/11/29/the_african_miracle

>>2612168
Your worries about overpopulation are overblown. Birthrates will plummet naturally, and if it is necessary we will go the China route with controls on reproduction. And if we actually *have* to colonize the Sahara and the Antarctic just for space? Sounds like a Mars colony is actually a good idea rather than a sci-fi wet dream.

There was a time when people were desperately worried about how New York could function 100 years in the future. What were they going to do with all the horse shit? Not to mention supporting all the horses needed?

>>2612187

>and if it is necessary we will go the China route with controls on reproduction

Yes. But who would take the burden? Which countries would have to sacrifice their children?

Sweeping generalizations that wholly ignore human behavior aren't going to solve this. China did it because china has a completely different culture than most of the rest of the world.

It's going to suck. bottom line. There will be no easy answers like those above. We might not make it.

Remember, this is reality, not science fiction. We are not guaranteed survival. We are not guaranteed a future in space or anywhere. We must be careful with our tech.

You can't think that the entirety of humanity shares your worldview or will just roll over and accept your world view.

>>2612187

You seem to think that real estate developers have some responsibility to the human race. No. The poor are on their own. They'll have to colonize the sahara with no tech or money.

God you people view the world simplistically. Like some space opera where things will always go according to the author's mindset.

>>2612220
>Yes. But who would take the burden? Which countries would have to sacrifice their children?
The overpopulated ones. China is already doing it. Much of Europe has no need to.

>China did it because china has a completely different culture than most of the rest of the world.
That is entirely true. But each culture will adapt in its own way, if needed. But again, the EU has no such concerns.

>We might not make it.
Specify a timescale for your fatalism. A 100 years? No.

WOW

Anoterh selfsucking transhomo thred. Just fuckin get used to dying, faggots. It's the manly way to live life.

>>2612231
Stop making strawmen. You call me simplistic because I don't join you in your defeatism?

I agree that Africa is the sticky spot in the future. Everyone else seems that they will do fine. So are parts of Africa. But other parts - are lagging behind, to put it mildly.

Let's back up and look at what we're talking about. I think we might be talking past each other. Just what are we trying to say here?

>>2612238
0/10

>>2612238
I agree that facing mortality requires a great deal of maturity. But choosing death if there is an option?

>>2612238
>Immortals are homosexuals.
>Mortals are viriles.
My anus is ready.

>>2612234

>giving preference

>creating inequality

>oh this will go well.

How would you go about politically telling another country that they can only have one child but we can have as many as we like? How would you diplomatically propose that to people?

>Timescale

I honestly can't say. It all depends on circumstances. We're more likely to die out once we colonize space anyway.

>>2612273
There is no need. They can breed like rabbits if they wish. But we don't need to let them into our country.

>>2612282
Enjoy having the mentality of a daily mail reader or a stomrfag.

Has anyone seen the NOVA episode Can We Live Forever? I thought it was pretty cool, especially the part about regrowing organs.

>>2612250

That deep down humanity doesn't care whether or not it survives. It only cares about being comfortable in the here and now. You can wax philosophic but voting results prove that people only care about their own lives. If people honestly cared about their future or their kids, would they mind paying the taxes that fund that very future? And you're telling me that everyone will suddenly care about their fellow man this time that it's important? If people care about their fellow man, then why are there so many homeless in developed first world western countries?

I hate it. But everyone is on their own. If you're poor, the rich are not going to suddenly and mercifully sweep in with supertechnology and save the whole human race because it's the right thing to do. It's cheaper to let them die. It always is.

Am i wrong?

Why are you all concerned with the undeveloped world? Who cares what happens to the poor and uneducated when immortality is on the line. Their state is one of their own making. Africa is the best example. While the rest of the world was building civilizations they stayed the same. Power is for the ambitious!

>>2612259
WEll, that's what you transhomos do all they. Suck your own mental dick, cosily wrapped around your imagination. The singularity is your only hope of ever starting to live, amirite?

>>2612273
I propose we carpet bomb them

>>2612305
>If people care about their fellow man, then why are there so many homeless in developed first world western countries?
You're cynical, but unfamiliar with the actual reality. Homeless people are generally unable to hold a job, either because of mental illness or substance abuse. And we don't let them starve.

>>2612305
>I hate it. But everyone is on their own. If you're poor, the rich are not going to suddenly and mercifully sweep in with supertechnology and save the whole human race because it's the right thing to do. It's cheaper to let them die. It always is.
Your worldview fails to acknowledge the existence of individual charity and philanthropy, not to mention international development aid. Ayn Rand was a bitch, but you seem to think that everyone is an objectivist.

Yes, your worldview is wrong.

>>2612305
This is the topic of which I hope comes to a boiling-point in culture in this century.

Those humans who wish to be truly human, and exploit our mental reasonings and ability to cooperate to the fullest to seize the future of humanity.

And animals who could care less and gladly live complacent lives of consumption, ignorance, and gratification.

Only now, as humans have the ability to communicate instantaneously on a global scale, is it possible for any coherent action to come of it.

>>2612335
Unfortunittly I've foun that many otherwise intelgent people get very defencive when you start talking about where you believe the line that devides the sentient from the non-sentient is.

>>2612351

The line is movable?

Or are you confusing sapience with sentience?

>>2612330

>Homeless people are generally unable to hold a job, either because of mental illness or substance abuse.

That's despicable. You're telling me that in the midst of a global recession with more people out of work since the 20's the ONLY reason people are homeless is because they either want to be or they're on drugs? ARE YOU FOR REAL?

No. fuck you. that's just the sort of apathy and blind stupidity that is ruining the world. "oh, they want to be that way, it'd be a waste to help them" is going to be applied to the whole goddamn world when the time comes.

>And we don't let them starve.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/nov/17/millions-hungry-households-us-report

>International aid.

Oh yes. We certainly did great with Haiti. sold it straight to the highest bidder. or are you talking about the pittance that charities actually give to the people they supposedly represent?

>>2611821
>>2611821
>>2611821
>>2611821


SAUCE?
what is the comic called?

>>2612361
Dresden Codak, it's a webcomic about transhumanism.

>>2612330
Hey. Hey you. We have these posters in Europe, China, and Australia. I know a British friend of mine has been seeing them in the Underground.

>>2612357
What are you going to do about it? Express your concern with friends over a cup of fair trade organic coffee? Argue on 4chan?

>>2612372
>>2612372
Erm... can you only ever see the latest or the first comic strip? This is really confusing and gay. Where is the rest of the story?

>>2612356
No, I'm just saying that many people don't like it when you sugjest that many humans are a few steps behind from an evolutionary perspective and may not have acheved sentience.

Honistly, sentient thought was more than likely an evolutionary blunder, a freak mutation with no lead in or intermediate stage (such as gliding before flying).

>>2612389

America is now grouped with third world countries in need of charity for basic necessities.

This is sad, yet amusing.

>>2612414
>that many humans are a few steps behind from an evolutionary perspective and may not have acheved sentience.

>>2612389
We need to make our technology better then. We don't have to give all our money away to feed the poor, we need to change how we make and distribute food. Greed and human nature aren't the reason people are starving, inefficient distribution is the reason. GMO's got off to a rough start, but they're improving and hopefully farming in 3rd world nations will be much easier . One of our main goals should be farming on former rainforest land. It's terrible land, I know, but we could use all that space to produce food.

>>2612418
America may as well be a third-world country.

We don't have universal health care.
Our education system constantly gets cut across the board.
Water is starting to be disputed over...

America : Third-world Country, First-rate Business.

>>2612357
>You're telling me that in the midst of a global recession with more people out of work since the 20's the ONLY reason people are homeless is because they either want to be or they're on drugs? ARE YOU FOR REAL?
You seem to think I don't give a shit. That's not true - I donate generously to causes that benefit the poor. But look it up - it's true. Most homeless people are either suffering from mental illness or substance abuse that prevents them from keeping a job. Many of them don't even WANT jobs.

>No. fuck you. that's just the sort of apathy and blind stupidity that is ruining the world. "oh, they want to be that way, it'd be a waste to help them" is going to be applied to the whole goddamn world when the time comes.
Oh, so now YOU care? I suppose I should have known you weren't heartless. The amoral don't complain about how "everyone is selfish".

Your combination of empathy (which is good) and cynicism (which is bad) is going to leave you bitter and empty. And you still won't have done anything about it, because of your cynicism.

>>2612408
http://dresdencodak.com/archives/

>>2612424
>We don't have universal health care.

Didn't you guys get that recently? Or did it only sound like it?

>>2612407

I'm working to be a journalist, actually. hoping to be like ed murrow and poke power with a stick.

It's better than nothing.

>>2612426
To moderate my earlier point, I don't meant to claim that mental illness and substance abuse are the ONLY causes of homelessness. Here's a good site.
http://www.nationalhomeless.org/factsheets/

>>2612434
I doesn't kick in until 2014, IIRC.

>>2612389
Is that for real?... Because that's kind of... ridiculous as well as insulting.
(American here btw).

>>2612436
>It's better than nothing.

I remember when you guys actually used to rise up and murder the fuck out of corrupt or oppressive organizations.

What happened?

>>2612434
Fortunately we're getting rid of that. Most of us didn't want it but it was passed anyway.

>>2612434
It was weak, weak legislation. Completely wrung dry really.

>>2612436
>Implying you wont get over your idealistic leftism as you get older.

>>2612446
We don't have it bad - yet.
If unemployment hits 20%, you'll see heads roll.

>>2612445
>insulting

That's easy to say on a full stomach. The millions your economy is starving are going to swallow their pride and take the food anyway.

I'd be more worried about what would happen if nothing is done. You can keep the populace complacent through a lot of things, but hunger is not one of them.

>>2612455
>implying the US receives or needs food aid
I agree that the rich-poor gap is despicable. But we don't need anyone's handouts, as a country.

Something's gotta give, eventually. At least the poor aren't getting poorer.

>>2612446

9/11 instilled in us that dissent = terrorism.

So nobody does it.

>>2612462

Well, you hang on to that hubris while we save a sixth of your population from starvation.

>>2612462

How about you let the hungry speak for themselves?

>>2612471
"We"?
Look, the point is that we have tons of food over here. Sending more isn't necessary. Fund and organize soup kitchens all your want, but shipping food across the Atlantic is not needed.

>>2612474
Get your head out of your ass. All I'm saying is that distributing resources in the US solves the problem. There's plenty of food.

>>2612471
Helping people in the US from starving, then rubbing it in the others face. Sounds like a plan.

I don't hate the US, I'm just really disappointed. You guys used to be fucking awesome.

>>2612455
I'm one of the less wealthy Americans and still make ~$24,000 a year. The only reason so many are unemployed here is because the refuse to take jobs they believe are below them. Unfortunitally that will remain the case till they stop receving handouts and get hungary.

>>2612455

>but hunger is not one of them.

There's a reason all fast food restaurants have dollar menus. They're necessary.

>>2612484
But staple foods from grocery stores are cheaper...

>>2612487

Name a meal you can buy at a grocery store for 2.73. You're lucky to get milk for that price, or a half pound of hamburger.

I guess we can always eat millet.

>>2612494
No, you don't get it. It's the per-meal price. A large bag of rice can go quite a long way.

>>2612475

If you think we're shipping food across the ocean you misunderstand the whole thing. We're handling the distribution that the rest of your country won't. The whole thing is being organized with Kraft Foods in the US.

>>2612494

Are you serious? Just off the top of my head I know you can get some minute steak and enough potato to fill you to bursting for less than that.

Pasta is even cheaper.

>>2612503
Ah, carry on then. As long as we agree on what's really going on here.

>>2612389

And I can 100% confirm those posters are full of shit.

Well, maybe not on the hardship part, but 1 in 8 Americans? Absolutely not. Not by a LONG shot.

No way. This is one of the things I'm directly involved in.

Anyone paying attention to those posters is being played, hardcore.

HOLY SHIT I WENT TO HIGH SCHOOL WITH AMBER

AHHHHHH

AHHHHHHHHHHH

>>2612503
>We're handling the distribution that the rest of your country won't.
>organized with Kraft Foods in the US.
mmmkay

Commendable effort and all, but maybe a little less scorn for the US side of the effort?

Sorry, couldn't resist

>>2612513

1 out of every 6, actually.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/nov/17/millions-hungry-households-us-report

>>2612517

The people involved in the effort have been great. They are not the ones being scorned.

>>2612523
Still planning on taking Tasmania by force without paying for the land, you hopelessly deluded faggot?

>>2612527

No, it's not even that close.

I'm well aware of corporate 'donation' scams. This is yet another one. The money will NOT go to feeding people. It simply won't. Churches actually do more than this company ever will.

Try 1 in 25.

>>2612541
'By force' implies we're going to go in there with heavy military equipment to chase out all the inhabitants.

>>2612527

>>2612548
Last I heard (from you), it was more "go in quietly, build up infrastructure, and then shoot the Australian army with railguns once they show up"

>>2612544

The guardian cited its source. Will you cite yours or do you expect us to take it on the authority of a 4chan poster?

>>2612554
The shoot Australian military with railguns was obviously me trolling.

>>2612564

Well of course not. The polarity would be reversed down under and you'd shoot yourself.

>>2612564
If you think it won't come to armed force very quickly, you're deluded.

Pay for your goddamn land.

>>2612562
My source is living in one of the most poor neighborhoods in the USA.

Niggas out here ain't got a DAMN PROBLEM staying fed.

>>2612570
Okay, I lol'd

>>2612580

An anecdote as evidence on /sci/. Awesome.

>>2612574
[citation needed]

>>2612589

Yep, see we grow our own shit out here. We know hoe to farm, so even us broke bitches on 28.8 dialup can still keep fed.

Now if only these fuckers could keep their legs closed.

>>2612590
Nation-states don't take well to militant squatters who refuse to pay taxes or respect the state's authority, especially over property.

Unless YOU have a good example of the Australian government behaving otherwise (besides the natives, who are either ignored or exploited anyway as they pose no thread and have no money), you're in trouble.

>>2612612
They're not using it, for one.
The area that will be claimed by us is FUCKING TINY especially if you look at the rest of Australia in comparison.
A very large percentage of the immigrants and citizens of the TRS would be Australians and people from other first-world countries
Not to mention we WILL make it their while. For instance, the rent-a-factory system. They supply us with the blueprints and raw materials to make whatever they want, we make it for them and send it back with no monetary charge. This is an incredibly beneficial trade system for them. They send us the raw silicon and so forth, we poop out advanced microprocessors for them. And more incentives for them to be friendly with us will come. As another anon said, they will be forced to acknowledge us simply due to our system's and living standards superiority. Hell, by some remote chance they might want to adopt something like our system.

>>2612619
Your entire plan is to not stay insignificant for long. You're going to have to pay the piper, or shoot him in the face.

>>2612612

Australia's had a few instances of independent micro-nations pop up and they basically just sent them nasty letters and did nothing. Those states eventually just collapse on their own because they're unworkable, though.

eg: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Principality_of_Hutt_River

>>2612619
>They send us the raw silicon and so forth, we poop out advanced microprocessors for them.
Yeah, you're not popping out a world-class microprocessor fab anytime soon.

Paint the picture for me. You and a hundred hand-picked people with a couple million dollars. What do you do for the first year on the ground?

>>2612623
Not to stay insignificant in what way?
Any serious expansion of our borders will most likely happen on other celestial bodies, such as the moon and Mars.

>>2612631
As soon as you're anything beyond the level of a hippie commune, you will have to form a relationship with your neighbor nation-state. And it sure as hell doesn't start as a relationship of equals. You're going to pay taxes.

>>2612628
>Australia's had a few instances of independent micro-nations pop up and they basically just sent them nasty letters and did nothing.
See, THIS is reasonable. They're unhappy, and they DO notice you, but they're not going to do anything until you're worth it.

The plan as I've understood it doesn't involve staying under the radar, or under the small-potatoes threshold.

>>2612643

I'm not making any argument in that regard. Just pointing out that Australia is somewhat unusual in that this actually happens with disproportionate regularity.

>>2612630
2020 - Deciding year whether to truly go ahead with the project. By this point I should've obtained a method of funding for out operations.
2022 - Go to Tasmania with a couple dozen other people and conduct a geological survey, figuring out where there are mineral deposits.
2023 - 2030 - In-depth planning of setting up, governmental systems, infrastructure.
2030 - Second deciding point where we see how far technology has progressed and whether five years from then we will be able to follow through with project.
2030 - 2035 - Continued refining of plan, recruit a few more supporters of the project.
2035 - 2038 - Largely underground excavation and construction using mostly materials onsite such as ores. We will require a small army of human-level AI robots, a blast furnace, and a method of powering all this. Of course food/shelter etc will be taken care of. By this time the middle ground inbetween a 3D printer and a molecular assembler should be invented (a printer that can print metals and so forth)
2039 - Above-ground construction. Do this as fast as possible to avoid the chances of discovery.
Nov 22 2039 - Unveiling.

>>2612638
We won't be making 'money' and therefore we don't have to pay taxes.
>>2612643
How the fuck do you think they're going to react when an ultra-modern nation calling all scientists, engineers and other educated folk to immigrate for a new life pops up in Tasmania? It's going to take them a while before they even start planning to invade, and by then if they do decide to, there's too many people in it that they would get grilled by the international community.

Man, Dresden Codak shits me to tears. It's just so... self-satisfied.

>>2612661
>We will require a small army of human-level AI robots
Why? You can just have more people.

>>2612674
>We won't be making 'money' and therefore we don't have to pay taxes.
Tell that to property taxes. Of course, you're not buying the property in the first place. You'll just have to hope no one who actually COOPERATES with the government finds your land valuable.

It's strange that you talk about a mutually beneficial relationship with the Australian government, and yet refuse to enter one.

>>2612702
>Why? You can just have more people
Because people actually like being paid for their hard work, and they can't work 24/7 with extreme precision like a robot in those times will be able to.
>It's strange that you talk about a mutually beneficial relationship with the Australian government, and yet refuse to enter one.
The amount of money Australia will earn simply off our rent-a-factory system will be far more than they would be able to obtain in property taxes or purchasing the land.

>>2612714
>Because people actually like being paid for their hard work
And the humans on the project are contributing.... why?

And if it works for some humans, why not more? Relying on robots from the get-go makes it seem like the whole thing is infeasible. Can't you do it without robots, at least until you have all the industry to make your own?

>>2612714
Businesses pay taxes. And bureaucracies don't like making exceptions. You're fighting the system needlessly.

>>2612682
Let me cheer you up. Within 30 years, statistically within your lifetime, Ray Kurzweil will die. Within 100 years everyone who now believes in the Singularity will be dead.

>>2612727
Why do I have such a shit-eating grin while I read that

>>2612719
>And the humans on the project are contributing.... why?
Because after the system is set up, they will either be able to lay back in their state-of-the-art house next to their indoor pool sipping Monster and lurking 4chan or collaborate with other like-minded people to set up huge bases on the moon, or Mars. Or maybe they wish to work on advanced robotics or transhuman upgrades. Maybe they want to start a massive underwater civilian colony.
>And if it works for some humans, why not more? Relying on robots from the get-go makes it seem like the whole thing is infeasible. Can't you do it without robots, at least until you have all the industry to make your own?
By that time we will have enough funds for the necessary robots. Robots can have blueprints uploaded into their databanks and collaborate through wireless connections for a massive increase in efficiency, and accuracy of the plan. Not to mention the sheer cut-down of construction time.

Anyway, I'm glad for Amber. Good to know that someone from Cheyenne did something with their life haha.

>>2612722
>fighting the system needlessly
Hurr.

>>2612727
I'm sure that's what the Romans said about the Pagans, Celts, and Druids

>>2612733
>By that time we will have enough funds for the necessary robots. Robots can have blueprints uploaded into their databanks and collaborate through wireless connections for a massive increase in efficiency, and accuracy of the plan. Not to mention the sheer cut-down of construction time.
Stop dodging the fucking question.

If there's no strong-AI robots around, are you fucked or not?

>>2612786
Should've asked that outright. And yes, if they don't come, the project is postponed until they do.

>>2612778
...and they were right. 100 years later, all of those Druids, Celts, and Pagans were dead.

I want to be a physicist in the Technocratic Republic of Sci. I'll make half of this goal happen if you do the same for the other half, Inurdaes.

>>2612826
Except that celtic heritage, practicing druids, and pagan practice still live to this day.

Whereas the Roman Empire has fallen.

>>2612828
Sounds like a plan.

What's interesting about this pic is that the coast line looks remarkably like where one of the other cities will be placed. Namely Aircastle (codename)

>>2612802
>if they don't come, the project is postponed until they do.
I don't think you have a very well-developed socioeconomic theory fails utterly if it doesn't have strong AI robots. I call bullshit.

If it can't be done with human labor, adding sapient robots doesn't suddenly change the underlying problem.

For instance, a common critcism of objectivism is that it relies on inexaustible cheap labor that just magically happens.

>>2612848
>I don't think you have a very well-developed socioeconomic theory if it fails utterly if it doesn't have strong AI robots.
fix'd

>>2612848
Sapient robots make the ultra-high living standards of the TRS possible. If we can't do that, no point. It will just become another decaying micronation.

>>2612848
>For instance, a common critcism of objectivism is that it relies on inexaustible cheap labor that just magically happens.

>>2612860

>>2612093
Though a bit late to the thread:

is it not a far greater evil to withhold from the near entirety of mankind such a technology? If it were kept from YOU, wouldn't YOU be incensed by that fact? I can tell you that I sure as hell would be rioting in the streets with the rest of 'em.

But that aside, it would be a completely backwards economic strategy to not sell such products.

>>2612859
Again, sir, bullshit. If you have a strong socioeconomic model that works, it should work BEFORE you have techno-magic to do manual labor for you.

I get the feeling you've never used a shovel.

>>2612864
>But that aside, it would be a completely backwards economic strategy to not sell such products.
This, claiming it wouldn't be sold reeks of conspiracy-theory-insanity. It might be expensive, though. Out of necessity, I mean.

>>2612870
I helped build my parents house when I was 14. And no, the entire point of the nation is for automation to do the vast majority of tedious/repetitive work. If it doesn't have the 'bots, it fails. Your point? Take cars/vehicles or coal/oil away from the US for a month and see what fucking happens.

>>2612884
I understand that basic models require basic conditions.

But it seems really short-sighted to not have a fallback option. Is it capitalism?

I mean, if a virus wipes out all your AI, your entire civilization goes back to.... what model?

>>2612902
There will be backup simple automation that can do 75% of the work that is not interconnected and can only be programmed by hand w/ several passwords and heavy firewalls. The other will be a massive call on people to do a few hours of volunteer work while we get the systems back online.

>>2612902
A virus could wipe out humanity too. Are we supposed to fault capitalism that it doesn't take into account Bird Flu?

>>2612631
Have you considered seasteading. Polite sage in case my post is retarded.

>>2612727