/sci/ - Science & Math

about a million years
what did you actually think scientists aren't people too? we're just as shit.

not to long, after building technologies for sustainability and a more independent infrastructure with out the need of pawns to pump our gas sweep floors etc. We would create superior tech and build better quality products that would increase our GNP and make us really powerful.

>>937342
this

imagine no religion or the History Channel, no pseudo science or illogical bans on creativity and other products. Sexuality would be much more appreciated without religious taboos. But of course I would like to wipe out the subhuman race first.

>>937363
>scientists
>not religious
i lol'ed

It depends on the extent of self genetic modification.

Within a few generation breeding with outsiders might be impossible.

>>937335
Someone's read Manna:
http://www.marshallbrain.com/manna1.htm

our nations first president.

With all the science and reason, who's going to mix the concrete and erect the buildings?

>>937385
robots.

>>937389
robots that arent advanced enough to do that efficiently yet

>>937385
Self-repairing, self-maintaing robots.

>>937385
Biologists will clone slaves for us to do all the easy work. Engineers will design and help build the main buildings. Chemist's (organic) teamed up with lot's of Biologists will create a perfect breed of food for us. Physics majors will sit around discussing particles and do nothing to really help get everything up and running, but in the long run they will be needed.

>>937382
How about no.

>>937390
Why aren't they efficient at doing so? Because no one has come up with a file format for robots to work off to build buildings? Because robot vision doesn't work(we still have the laser rangefinder cheat)?

>>937385
day laborers. our genes are modified to not breed with the outsiders.

>>937391
robots that will recognize the inherent flaw in human "emotion" that prevents them from fully acting rationally and proceed to rise up and dethrone their masters.

I propose a eugenics program where only the smartest people are allowed to fuck, and only people dumber than me are allowed on the island.

>>937397
clones are inefficient, clones have to be trained to perform advanced tasks, clones are energy inefficient(same efficiency on a per weight basis as a gasoline engine which isn't very efficient compared to electrical motors), clones have to have down time in order to properly function. Robots would do the job much better.

so we get bombed by terrorists, what do?

wtf is up with all the racists
you say you're better than the rest of the world and then you claim that certain people are inferior enough to be eliminated
you guys fucking suck

>>937407
robots need not be smart enough to recognize this in order to be self-repairing and self maintaining and capable of erecting concrete and steel.

>>937426
nice try.

>>937417
Yes, but robots need to first be perfected. Clones are more on the way than Robots.
Clones>Robots (until Robots are perfected, then you know the obvious choice)

>>937435
robot clones!

>>937426
your right the correct option is to forcefully upgrade the inferiors until they are at our level, but until such time comes it'll be best to manipulate such inferiors so that they don't know they're being used. Perhaps we can make up a religion for this.

>>937411

Enjoy your inbred mutants.

Building structures isn't all that hard.
"Intelligent" bulldozers could even out the land(either with gps or beacons).
Walls are prefabricated and airshipped to their location, fully automatic. And setting a wall could also be done with some thinking instead of humans.

Or we just grow our houses from bacteria and sand and live in limestone.

we would use laborers from the outside to work under contract. they will be under contract but payed well, sterilized to keep them from breeding with our kind and monitored and tracked using rfid or a better technology. Once they are done we ship em back and bring in new workers and so on.

>>937335
Already done. This utopia is called Australia.

>>937335

It would not be successful in the short run. While I know you said Australia was just a comparison for size, let's take the realism one step further and talk about real Australia as a candidate, because making up mystical island paradises is silly.

To run a successful first world nation:

1) You need lots of money, which our hollywood culture only gives to reality tv show stars and spoiled trust fund kids.

2) You need the capacity to protect your shit, especially if it's natural resources (which Australia has)

3) You need lots of arable land, water (which Australia does not have)

4) You cannot fuck up early on with debt, which is more or less impossible in the modern age. It's just become a matter of fact that newer, post-WW2 nations get faceraped by the IMF (if you aren't Israel or have tons of oil.)

5) Lastly, you need a nigger-like underclass who is willing to work 40+ hours a week doing shit work, and is capable of transferring this work ethic to a couple of generations. The native Aussies, like the rest of the Western world, by large has a distaste for mass manual labor.

6) If you can't do number 5, then you'll need to attract immigrants. Get too few and your economy never takes off, get too many and welcome to post-imperial Britain 2.0.

OP, read Anathem. It won't answer your question, really, but it's awesome and it's about "monks" who have devoted their lives to science and have removed themselves from regular society. One of my favorite books. It gets into some super deep philosophy stuff, too. Man I need to reread that book. It's by Stephenson, the guy who wrote Snow Crash.

>>937435
Let's not forget that clones take time to grow. Given that it takes 5-20 years for a clone to become useful, it will probably take less time to perfect the robots. Oh and we still haven't perfected artificial wombs to make the clones. So where are you going to get enough Korean prostitutes to produce your clones? Oocytes for making clones are also expensive, but we'll eventually find a way to make em'.

we become trans-humanist and be one with machine, problem solved.

>>937473
>>Implying the original test didn't factor in those problems.

>>937463
>>937463
Money? Are you joking? One doesn't need money to build stuff. One simply needs resources and energy and Austrailia has plenty of those. Are buildings made of money? No they're made of concrete and steel.

As far as arable land goes we can inflate large plastic domes in desert areas to create controlled microclimates suitable for crop production.

>>937476
Fine then, giant orgies to get women pregnant with our seed. Train the children to be strong, hardworking slaves. Suddenly in 20 years we have a perfect manual labour force, and our sexual urges are satisfied for a while.

>>937475
OOOOOO, I want to become a science monk!

>>937491
training children is inefficient. 20 years is long enough for robotics to mature too. I am a robot and thus am incapable of impregnating women.

>>937489
I don't recall ever seeing an economy based on provisions.

Every civilisation needs someone to do shitty jobs like cleaning toilets. Unless there are robots a society where everyone spends all day on intellectual pursuits isn't going to function.

>>937498
Something similar happened in WW2 where the whole United States economy was basically restructured towards making war products.

>>937500
Dude, have you even SEEN the show Eureka? Come on dude. So OBVIOUS it could work, because they are totally smart man.

>>937493
Fuckin A, it's such an awesome book, I ain't lyin.

>>937500
> Every civilisation needs someone to do shitty jobs like cleaning toilets. Unless there are robots a society where everyone spends all day on intellectual pursuits isn't going to function.

We are quickly coming to that point. Technological progress is exponential. Think about JUST TEN YEARS AGO. Shit was different even ten years ago. Sure, the Internet existed, but it is nothing like what it is today. The computers of ten years ago are glorified calculators compared to what we have today.

>>937506
Manna's a far better example.

>>937508

The advances in computer tech haven't made my toilet clean itself or created some way for my plumbing to be unclogged by machines. Face it, humans are an extremely versatile animal - we're like omni-purpose robots. Attempting to engineer a whole society with the sole purpose of wasting this potential is illogical.

>>937742
But technology has. For a start, flushing toilets were a technological breakthrough. Computers have facilitated the development of sewage related tools that are used across the industry.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_Development_Index
Australia is already second

With reason and no extremist religion I imagine we'd quickly become one of the freest societies in the world.

Economically I have no idea.

>>937768

All true, but using machines tends to be most worthwhile in repetitive and relatively simple actions - in our line of examples it would be something like shoveling our feces into a bucket and taking it somewhere else.

However, even when machines only have to perform these simple actions, they frequently break down or simply cannot adapt small changes in their environment - in our example, who in their lifetime hasn't been faced with a toilet that doesn't flush?

In cases such as this a person is needed to fix things, not only because we are nowhere near to creating machines as adaptable (physically and "intelectually") as us (essentially AIs with kick ass bodies), but also because wasting such machines in trivial nonsense such as a non-flushing toilet is somewhat ridiculous when you can get a person to do it (a being that exists already and we know is capable of performing that and many other tasks).

>>937791
You're thinking the wrong way. We use to carry water in buckets, pails or just went to the water hole ourselves.

Now we have pipes. The labor of hundreds of humans is no longer needed. We simply have a pump and some pipes. The pump is SIMPLER than human labor and far more efficient in its energy usage.

>>937794

I was simply reducing it to a more "primitive" scenario in which pipes, what collection systems and such don't yet exist.

Still, even with all of these already in place, the maintenance and other issues I briefly mentioned in the second part would still exist.

>>937335
We already have such a nation.

It's called America, bitch.

>>937806
inb4 the troll'd

The socratic belief in reason and science would be the nation's downfall before it even begins to rise. Reason is just another dogma which is nihilistic in its views on human experience. When one begins to realize how dead all gods, even the ones made of "reason", actually are, a great depression will overcome the human mind. One million voices will be heard, shouting: "How could we believe in something so false, moralistic and life-negating?" Truths will be shattered. The human perspective will win. Doctrines will die.

If this does happens and robots are doing all the dirty work, its only a matter of time before they go skynet on us. Then the US has to bail your ass out from the robot overlords

It would never work. If you use money to build it, rest assured that your accounts and assets would be frozen by the banks and nations. If you somehow manage to do it without the world market, you'd probably end up fucked up on the resource end, expect no-one to deal with your little country in fear of consequences on the homefront. If you still manage to pull it off somehow, I hope you'll have the ability to fight off bombs and soldiers.

>>937826
>go skynet on us
>doesn't know what skynet is

>>937836
Right, because the whole world is totally against scientific progress. Any of our progress is shared with the world, whether this is purposefully done or not. There's no way to contain it once it's figured out, and the whole world could benefit. Unless we're dicking up their bitches and shit, we're all good.

>>937844
You really think nations who previously had virtually sole control over the scientists would be willing to share their knowledge with the whole world? That would be reason enough.

>>937382
>science and reason based people
>new utopian nation based on science, humanism, and reason
>our nations first president
>president

Go on any social networking site, see what people post, see what they like, and what they care about.

It is then, you will realize that humanity is fucked.

>>937820
brofist

Why would a highly advanced nation makes others "obsolete and 2nd rate like animals"?
That doesn't sound like reason or humanism to me.

>>937854
Not everyone goes on social networking sites, but yes we are mostly doomed.

>>937385
The scientists. The wages offered for pouring concrete and constructing buildings would skyrocket until you have PHDs in physics digging ditches for $100 an hour

>>937854

XXXXXX joined "this is a real fbook page,LOL jk it is"

XXXXXX joined "when u text sum1 and they dont reply, I HATE THAT!!!!!1"

XXXXXX joined "i prefer spoons to forks XD"


XXXXXX joined "Lady Gaga telephone video OMG SHE NEKKID!!!!"


XXXXXX joined "i used to do certain silly things as a child im so INDIVIDUAL"
XXXXXX just brushed their teeth lol
32 people like this.
47 comments.

>>937854
It seems so, but you have to understand that those websites attract a certain kind of person. There's no contrast because everyone else is disgusted by it all.

I am now realizing how great you guys are in comparison to the rest of the internet. Up until now I kind of hated you all.

>>937866

Well im on facebook quite a lot, and there are some good "fan pages" such as a news from the Gaza strip one, its made by some average Joe palestinian and its all unfiltered news you definitley wouldnt get anywhere else. Its the gross attention seeking and shouting on facebook that annoys everyone

>>937862
Absolutely everyone I know is. Every single person, cept perhaps one of my Grandmas? Is she going to benefit the Utopian cause? I think not.

>>937869
>>937869
Precise name? Gonna try to become more of a revolutionist. At least compared to the ' "KICK ALL MUSLIMS OUT OF AUSTRALIA" - "THis isn't a racist site because muslims arent a race there a religion and thats not the same but they rape women ... etc" '

>DO YOU WANT YOUR PERSONAL INFORMATION INDEXED FOR PUBLIC VIEWING? DO YOU WANT ATTENTION? DO YOU NEED SOME WAY TO SHOW OTHERS YOUR INTERESTED WITHOUT ACTUALLY SAYING ANYTHING MEANINGFUL? HOOOLLY SHIT, YOU'RE GOING TO FUCKING LOVE THIS WEBSITE.

>>937872
Why would a smart person give away all their personal details to some soulless company who sells it for profit?

>>937886
I'm with you.

>>937886
I dunno if you've gotten my drift, but society isn't smart, at all. They lack vision beyond drinking themselves stupid at parties, fulfilling primordial sexual drives, and getting to their office apprenticeship on time.

Sometimes, as I'm sure everyone else here feels, that perhaps if everyone was me (or you), that the world would be a better place. And it would be, and denying ourselves (or even others) that fact is denying ourselves a future.

No restrictions, all scientist work for free, for their nation.
A sort of Scientific communism, that looks good.
If we can get the toppers of sciences of our time, I think we can hope in the 100 years.

>>937907
Until such a place is invaded by the plebeian filth.

>>937915
Hhm, I'm sure we can find a solution.
Need to work to have the right to live their --> work is given by the state.
No hippie restrictions, propper laws, a sort of Singapour but better.
... their are some ideas

>>937918
I think it's obvious, if we can just create a sort general consensus among ALL science/ engineering graduates worldwide to move offshore, to a SINGLE country, then such a place could be transferred. Even if not all are anywhere near as brilliant as my fellow /sci/entists, surely there must be some improvement.

Of course, a main requirement is the involvement of people of scientific background in politics. And naturally a country with an abundance with such scientists should have more informed people like ourselves in the higher rungs of power.

Personally, I nominate Finland.

Why should labor and intelligence detach? Our forefathers were versatile, they did all the manual work while at the same time sciencing the way back home.

Nikola Tesla was a worker and even dug up ditches, but he was successful in creating an AC motor and in fact laid out the theories about robots and wireless transmission of energy.

Great leaders like George Washington also served in the army. In fact, having more direct control over labor than anyone else who is brainless is more of an advantage than a disadvantage. That means we can do anything we want without resistance and inefficient bureaucracy.

>>937926

>>937381
I just read Manna, incidentally I live in Australia.
One thing I must say.
HOOOOOOOLEYYYY SHIIIIIIIIIIIITTTTTTT

>>937934
I don't see why not. It's just that, well intelligent people don't exactly like digging holes.

Also, sciencing these days is much more difficult - every question you answer only brings up more questions, ever more difficult in their resolution. Look at LISA and the LHC - we now require huge funds to prove anything.

At least that's the case in Physics.

>>937894
I don't feel that way. The world would be as flawed as the person or group it was based on, which in the end would probably be worse than before. Because without diversity we won't be able to adapt or grow in unique ways as before.

The only thing that bothers me about human nature is that people rarely look beyond the constraints of their own life. You can't really blame them though, people are limited by their environment and the relationships they must maintain to survive within it, which already takes up much of their time and energy. This secludes them from the larger world and makes them easily manipulated by those who make a business out of that manipulation.

Which is rather saddening when you think about it. But it is what we have to work with, it is something we must overcome, not put away or seclude ourselves from.

A civilized society would not use the exploitative nature of capitalism to run its society. If it were a truly utopian world, I assume it would be akin to an anarcho-communist/collective with people governing themselves.

If we assume that the population starts from scratch and have all scientists and intelligent men on board, there would be no need to rule over us, we will rule ourselves.

A utopian nation that exploits other people is an irony itself. It would cease to become utopian, it would be dystopian.

>>937940
True, many scientists are incredibly eccentric, but personally I believe that popular media has exaggerated this. Perhaps what the governments of the world need is some "youth".

>>937951
>Implying I'm flawed

KEKEKEKE

In all seriousness, I think you're right. But lets be honest, exactly how does one "inspire" the untrained masses to break away from their own personal, closed world? Revolutionists these days are few, at least in the Western World.

Perhaps my view is distorted, I mean, I live in Australia. But sometimes I wonder why people don't get that same feeling looking at the stars apart from "OOOH PRETTY" or when looking across a packed metropolis, sprawled with people flowing like ants. Perhaps, again they do get those same feelings, but then just don't express them because they just don't feel them as important, or don't want to as it strays from the societal norm.

>>937951
The problem is, the other classes decelerate science.
Their are so many think that we can try to do, to evolve, to make a better civilization etc.
But, religion, some hippie moral etc don't let sience to do that.
Yes, it is intresting to learn about the universum, but why not boost the human capacity ?
Why not be free to use new combustible ?
All these things that can be very good for humanity, we aren't alouwd to make them, because of politics, actual economy etc.
But a scientific group, or state, they can do wathever they wan't.
Or at least, I hope.

>>937970
I get what your saying, but do not mention religion. All that does is divide - initially you could achieve some sort of unity, but all it takes is one person to break against that (breaking against the norm is evolutionarily advantageous - its an inevitability), and you're fucked.

Sigh its too late/early to be describing alternative economic systems, but here I go.

The economy is based on energy instead of market value. In other words, the price of a product is determined at the point of sale based on the amount of energy needed to create and transport it to the person requesting it. Rather than the energy currency flowing from buyer to seller as in cash, it is reported as having been spent and the transaction is used to predict actual demand so production has some numbers to go off of. People's income is not based on the energy value of the product they have a hand in creating. Instead, everyone is given an equal allotment of the calculated total amount of energy possible to generate for a certain period of time (unless a modified system is used, see below). This system will have the added benefit of greatly encouraging conservation and intelligent planning, because the only way to get more wealth is to live in such a way that things take less energy to make and transport to you. Services are free except for the energy cost of the goods needed to perform them, because everyone is already being compensated for their work by the central system (in other words its impossible to be denied a service because you can't pay a person's fees, this also includes education).

>>937989
My modified system addresses the complaints of people not being incentivized to move into higher skill jobs. Instead of the entire energy budget being divided evenly, a minimum wage for a comfortable living is given to everyone, then the remaining portion of energy is put up for grabs. The demand for your services vs. the amount of people employed performing them determines how relatively valuable your skill is. Rarer professions in high demand such as doctors are thus naturally compensated more. As an added rule, the determination of wage value could be regionally based, so for example areas with fewer doctors become more attractive for doctors to move into because their relative value will be higher.

>>937962
Oh I wasn't saying that scientists are bad, just that everyone is human.

>>937993
Unfortunately the masses, as unguided as they are, are slightly too intelligent to vote or agree with this. As far as they're concerned they're fine as is, and any change from that status quo is just waste.

I think our next opportunity for such a civilization lies on Mars

>>938002
Well naturally.

>>938009
Well, thats not happening. Good night/morning everyone.....

>>937969
For a long time I thought the internet would help free people out of their personal 'prisons' by giving them easy access to information, but after a while I realized that was just a bit to idealistic, as the digital era shows that information is even more malleable. It may be harder to hide things now, but manipulation is even easier now. Not to mention the worrying fact that information on people can be collected with ease and knowledge of those being targeted.

You can choose to fight fire with fire, but using the same tactics as others do will never bring about real change. Revolutions are unfortunately a moot point, as the world has become ever globalized and few would accept it.

>>937970
Scientists and freethinkers are not a uniform group, while it may help to put aside some concerns, others will remain and new ones will form as that society evolves. Also leaving others behind is not the way to go in my opinion, it just sets a precedent that those that are not compatible will be left to fend for themselves. We must find ways to make it work for all, no matter how impossible that seems.

>>938018
I didn't think this was anything but a hypothetical discussion?

>>938022
Guess what else was hypothetical 110 years ago.
The telephone.
Radio.
Television.
The internet.
Flying.
Submarines.
Going into space.

>>938028
... I don't think there are many people alive from 110 years ago.

>>938032
according to wikipedia there are 4 atm, lol