Yeah, but until we have some really good robots (seriously, you don't know how smart an idiot is until you try to design a walking robot) they will still have trouble with brining the package up to your door.
Actually it can be quite sustainable. People tend to forget that 'base income' stuff goes strait back into the economy. It shifts money around a little (usually only a few percentage points of GDP), but people on basic income end up having a similar impact as neilson families, they steer where the economy goes to a degree, but every dollar they are 'given' gets handed right back to some company which goes to their employees and suppliers.
In many ways it actually increases the fluidity of the economy, money keeps moving and is produces a strong demand side economic base.
Well, it could be argued that what it takes is aliens. Humans will probably always have problems with otherness, but aliens are so other that it could easily refocus people to outside earth.
Thing is, within the Star Trek universe, there is no real reason an individual couldn't get a ship or a planet. I could see something like a wait list for time on a shipyard, but they show engineers building entire ships out of replicated parts in the series. I could easily see a maker community with plans for easy replicated ships, or even 'use a replicator to make a bigger replicator' patterns till you can just print out a whole ship. So I suspect that within that universe anyone who actually cared enough could do it.
Probably within most of our lifetimes at this point. If insurance companies get behind driverless cars, I could easily see trucking (esp the long distance kind, local delivery would be more difficult due to the final few meters) going that route in pretty short order.
True, humans will still be humans, but the things they compete over can change from real life impacting stuff to abstract or luxury. Right now such status is tied to critical elements of living, but no reason it has to be. Wealth could, for instance, be measured in awards or some other social symbol, so the difference between poor and rich is how many lines they have on their CV.
Even with space, with that kind of technology you can build up or down to your hear's content, or free floating cities in orbit.
As for the powers that be.... eh, for people who want to be better then others there will always be ways, it is just a matter of what society deems valuable. For instance if we moved from 'cars and houses' to 'degrees and books', you would probably see a big wave of people clamoring to get more education and bigger libraries. Take away material needs and I am sure people will still find social ways to stratify themselves. Just look at Star Fleet.. you have civilians, non-coms, officers and top brass. Not much room for lots of admirals and diplomats at the top.
I think part of the newness of the situation would be the lack of the 'limited resources' thing. It is an extreme that is unlikely to ever take place, it is interesting to ponder how you would run a civilization when resources (raw materials and energy) are effectively unlimited. Right now our hybrid capitalist/socialist economy is more or less the best solution given the situation and human psychology, but change situation that much and we would probably need to find some new way to organize society... crow, we would probably need to scrap and rethink what success criteria to use. Right now it is wealth, society and individuals are generally judged on how much wealth they have/generate and pretty much every bit of domestic and foreign policy circles back to optimizing the economy for maximum GDP or distribution. Take that away and what do we structure around? It would be fascinating to watch.
The problem is right now we are in a massive wave of being against things that benefit everyone or have systemic benefits. The big idea right now is selfishness, everyone focusing on getting ahead of everyone else and hoping that in aggregate it results in something positive.
While I imagine some people would be happy being in school for life, people still need to eat and pay rent and such, and grad school rarely pays very well IF it pays at all. So even if tuition is free, most people would either have to stop or would stop simply because university pay sucks and they can get more in private industry.
Just like some people try to use overly literal and unrealistic interpretations of the law as a defense (see: sovereign citizens), some people give technology too much credit in protecting them even though it is just a single link the the chain. The best encryption network in the world does not save you if you agree to meet an undercover agent in person to make in illegal transaction.
In theory yes, there are exchanges that support short sells, in practice I have heard that they are not terribly reliable and trying to collect generally does not work. Shorting regular commodities tends to work because you have the weight of federal regulation and law enforcement behind it, but few of the exchanges are really mature enough to have that kind of confidence behind them.
The thing about nice neutral countries though is they rarely fight to be put in charge of things. I would love to see, for instance, Denmark put in charge of ICANN, but they are not about to wrestle it away from the US and no one strong enough to make the US back down is going to just hand it off to a country that might be responsible with it.
True, just like a great time to buy BTC was during that brief window yesterday when they were trading for 100$.
Though I doubt there is really a profit or political motive in this case. Many people find the BTC crowd, or at least its more vocal proponents, rather obnoxious, and when you have people who do not like a group and a tool pops up for annoying them, at least a few people will be trollish enough to use it.
Hrm... "just shut up and take this other person`s money".
I love the sound of that tech, but it strikes me as something which, unless you are altruistic, you mostly hope other people buy since few people place any blame on themselves for accidents caused by their headlights.
Seriously, I would love a mod that ads some smart-mirrors to my car and automatically reflects back really bright headlights at other cars. Just as effective as a spotlight but more ironic.
The builder (or builder`s company) is also generally licensed and bonded. Most modern software shops have pretty much given up on software engineering and jump randomly from fad practice to fad practice with almost no maturity or consistency. Something as rigorous as following standards, licensing, carrying insurance... their heads would explode.
Well, yes and no. While it is hard to say what the original developer had in mind for sure, the user base has a variety of motivations behind it, some of which match up very well with what you said, others not so much.
For instance, I am in the 'payment method' camp. Since BTC is a push rather then pull protocol where you transfer money to a merchant rather then giving a merchant your special numbers and they transfer it from your account, I believe that could really cut down on many of the problems with see in internet transactions. Every time you use a credit card or even the banking system there is a risk of someone grabbing those special numbers and being able to drain your accounts since both systems just take the recipient's word that the amount is correct and they are indeed owed that money.
Slashdot Mirror
Yeah, but until we have some really good robots (seriously, you don't know how smart an idiot is until you try to design a walking robot) they will still have trouble with brining the package up to your door.
Actually it can be quite sustainable. People tend to forget that 'base income' stuff goes strait back into the economy. It shifts money around a little (usually only a few percentage points of GDP), but people on basic income end up having a similar impact as neilson families, they steer where the economy goes to a degree, but every dollar they are 'given' gets handed right back to some company which goes to their employees and suppliers.
In many ways it actually increases the fluidity of the economy, money keeps moving and is produces a strong demand side economic base.
Well, it could be argued that what it takes is aliens. Humans will probably always have problems with otherness, but aliens are so other that it could easily refocus people to outside earth.
Thing is, within the Star Trek universe, there is no real reason an individual couldn't get a ship or a planet. I could see something like a wait list for time on a shipyard, but they show engineers building entire ships out of replicated parts in the series. I could easily see a maker community with plans for easy replicated ships, or even 'use a replicator to make a bigger replicator' patterns till you can just print out a whole ship. So I suspect that within that universe anyone who actually cared enough could do it.
Probably within most of our lifetimes at this point. If insurance companies get behind driverless cars, I could easily see trucking (esp the long distance kind, local delivery would be more difficult due to the final few meters) going that route in pretty short order.
True, humans will still be humans, but the things they compete over can change from real life impacting stuff to abstract or luxury. Right now such status is tied to critical elements of living, but no reason it has to be. Wealth could, for instance, be measured in awards or some other social symbol, so the difference between poor and rich is how many lines they have on their CV.
"Could" being an important word of course.
Even with space, with that kind of technology you can build up or down to your hear's content, or free floating cities in orbit.
As for the powers that be.... eh, for people who want to be better then others there will always be ways, it is just a matter of what society deems valuable. For instance if we moved from 'cars and houses' to 'degrees and books', you would probably see a big wave of people clamoring to get more education and bigger libraries. Take away material needs and I am sure people will still find social ways to stratify themselves. Just look at Star Fleet.. you have civilians, non-coms, officers and top brass. Not much room for lots of admirals and diplomats at the top.
2004? I feel cheated...... screw flying cars, where is my holodeck!
I think part of the newness of the situation would be the lack of the 'limited resources' thing. It is an extreme that is unlikely to ever take place, it is interesting to ponder how you would run a civilization when resources (raw materials and energy) are effectively unlimited. Right now our hybrid capitalist/socialist economy is more or less the best solution given the situation and human psychology, but change situation that much and we would probably need to find some new way to organize society... crow, we would probably need to scrap and rethink what success criteria to use. Right now it is wealth, society and individuals are generally judged on how much wealth they have/generate and pretty much every bit of domestic and foreign policy circles back to optimizing the economy for maximum GDP or distribution. Take that away and what do we structure around? It would be fascinating to watch.
The problem is right now we are in a massive wave of being against things that benefit everyone or have systemic benefits. The big idea right now is selfishness, everyone focusing on getting ahead of everyone else and hoping that in aggregate it results in something positive.
While I imagine some people would be happy being in school for life, people still need to eat and pay rent and such, and grad school rarely pays very well IF it pays at all. So even if tuition is free, most people would either have to stop or would stop simply because university pay sucks and they can get more in private industry.
Just like some people try to use overly literal and unrealistic interpretations of the law as a defense (see: sovereign citizens), some people give technology too much credit in protecting them even though it is just a single link the the chain. The best encryption network in the world does not save you if you agree to meet an undercover agent in person to make in illegal transaction.
In theory yes, there are exchanges that support short sells, in practice I have heard that they are not terribly reliable and trying to collect generally does not work. Shorting regular commodities tends to work because you have the weight of federal regulation and law enforcement behind it, but few of the exchanges are really mature enough to have that kind of confidence behind them.
Not really. I simply believe that some random person being a jerk is a high probability given the low cost and low value involved.
Well, except Esperanto.
The thing about nice neutral countries though is they rarely fight to be put in charge of things. I would love to see, for instance, Denmark put in charge of ICANN, but they are not about to wrestle it away from the US and no one strong enough to make the US back down is going to just hand it off to a country that might be responsible with it.
True, just like a great time to buy BTC was during that brief window yesterday when they were trading for 100$.
Though I doubt there is really a profit or political motive in this case. Many people find the BTC crowd, or at least its more vocal proponents, rather obnoxious, and when you have people who do not like a group and a tool pops up for annoying them, at least a few people will be trollish enough to use it.
Hrm... "just shut up and take this other person`s money".
I love the sound of that tech, but it strikes me as something which, unless you are altruistic, you mostly hope other people buy since few people place any blame on themselves for accidents caused by their headlights.
Oh we past that a long time ago. It has been "I am scared, can I have more then sheep at least?" for a while now.
This looks like a job for a mirrors!
Seriously, I would love a mod that ads some smart-mirrors to my car and automatically reflects back really bright headlights at other cars. Just as effective as a spotlight but more ironic.
The builder (or builder`s company) is also generally licensed and bonded. Most modern software shops have pretty much given up on software engineering and jump randomly from fad practice to fad practice with almost no maturity or consistency. Something as rigorous as following standards, licensing, carrying insurance... their heads would explode.
I am not even sure where people get this idea that there is no evidence for macro evolution.
Which means, in a science classroom, it is not a theory.
So is it too late to make a comment saying one should make their own shell, with blackjack and hookers, only forget the shell and the blackjack?
Well, yes and no. While it is hard to say what the original developer had in mind for sure, the user base has a variety of motivations behind it, some of which match up very well with what you said, others not so much.
For instance, I am in the 'payment method' camp. Since BTC is a push rather then pull protocol where you transfer money to a merchant rather then giving a merchant your special numbers and they transfer it from your account, I believe that could really cut down on many of the problems with see in internet transactions. Every time you use a credit card or even the banking system there is a risk of someone grabbing those special numbers and being able to drain your accounts since both systems just take the recipient's word that the amount is correct and they are indeed owed that money.