Woolygimp's Blog

Woolygimp

Knight of the Realm
1,614
0
Reactions
319 44 0 0
#1
When machines put 75% of our labor force out of work, and we all start receiving basic income via stipends, then that doesn't that change us to a Socialist/Communist society?

What will people start spending their time on? Increasingly entertaining games and media? Working to improve the environment? There will obviously still require people in the services industry, politics, and criminal justice system. Do they receive more money?

The impact machines will have on our economy really interests me. Also, what's to prevent overconsumption (which is already taking place)? People buy a lot of shit they don't need and it's placing undo pressure on our natural resources. When machines take over, production can technically only be limited by resources so we could literally very quickly run out if consumption isn't controlled.

Here's my post further down:

We already have examples of post-scarcity economies in history. Rome was a post-scarcity society. They handed out grain to all of the cities inhabitants, who were largely unemployed, and gave them free access to games that cost the state massive amounts of money. Bread and Circuses.

All the land was owned by the elite, all the labor done by slaves and soldiers. They literally had nothing to do except eat, sleep, and fuck, which they did.

Replace slaves and soldiers in that example with robots. Same thing. We'll have free food and media (to keep us entertained). In fact, there's a solution to the Fermi Paradox that states that once a society reaches a certain level, they stop expanding because they get far more enjoyment about of virtual reality. Basically, at a certain point anything they can do in real life can be -perfectly- replicated in a virtual environment, so there's no fucking point to actually living life.

Think about it. You want to enlist in Starfleet for adventure/exploration? Why? They can create an even more adventurous Galaxy for you to explore, while you don't risk your life when your anti-matter/warp engine inexplicably explodes like it does in every episode. Think about whatever you dreamed you want to be. You could do it, without the risk of death.

It actually makes sense as a solution to the Fermi Paradox. Why expand or conquer the Universe when you can literally do everything in virtual reality without having to die. The only reason to expand is redundancy, should your planet suffer a catastrophic disaster. But not enough to expand past a few solar systems.

That's the future.
 
Last edited:

Kiroy

Marine Biologist
<Donor All-Stars>
19,324
17d 38m
Reactions
47,609 1,618 0 0
#2
Migration complete. Circle of life my friends.
 

Picasso3

Karazhan Raider
10,747
5h 57m
Reactions
4,893 3,347 0 0
#3
With how well hillary is doing in the polls I'd say so
 

AngryGerbil

AntiBad Activist
<Donors Crew>
13,890
Reactions
15,920 1,023 0 0
#4
Write your own postmodern dystopian fantasy, don't ask us to do it for you!
 

Kharzette

Watcher of Overs
1,275
3d 8h 38m
Reactions
345 50 0 0
#6
The Iain Banks future doesn't seem so bad. Live as long as you want, do whatever you want. Machines run everything important.

Less social/commu and more ... Libertarian I guess? Not really sure what you'd call it.
 

Kiroy

Marine Biologist
<Donor All-Stars>
19,324
17d 38m
Reactions
47,609 1,618 0 0
#7
This conversation at our current technology level is retarded. The impact will be negligible over the next couple decades. Call me when we've cracked unlimited power, then we can talk post scarcity society.

By the way, you might want to brush up on the difference and definitions of socialism, communism, and post scarcity. Your posts would make more sense and sound less infantile.

You still my bro though.
 

Tuco

Janitor of the Realm
32,617
13d 17h 27m
Reactions
37,982 2,778 0 0
#8
Not inevitable, but concepts like guaranteed wages become more tolerable. But, johnny handouts getting 30k usd a yewr doesnt mean the wealthy will give up the means of production.
 

Kuro

Blackwing Lair Raider
2,899
7d 16h 41m
Reactions
1,837 52 0 0
#9
Like I'm sharing my nanomachine cloud with you plebs.
 

Arbitrary

<Donors Crew>
10,113
21d 2h 10m
Reactions
12,374 273 0 0
#11
When machines put 75% of our labor force out of work, and we all start receiving basic income via stipends, then that doesn't that change us to a Socialist/Communist society?

What will people start spending their time on? Increasingly entertaining games and media? Working to improve the environment? There will obviously still require people in the services industry, politics, and criminal justice system. Do they receive more money?

The impact machines will have on our economy really interests me. Also, what's to prevent overconsumption (which is already taking place)? People buy a lot of shit they don't need and it's placing undo pressure on our natural resources. When machines take over, production can technically only be limited by resources so we could literally very quickly run out if consumption isn't controlled.

Fairness is hard-coded into mammals. There's always going to be massive amounts of friction in a socialist system.
 

Gravel

Baron of the Realm
14,249
10d 16h 6m
Reactions
15,547 497 0 0
#12
I believe that more than likely, we'll just end up doing other shit for work.

Didn't they think the same thing was going to happen during the industrial revolution? The two time periods aren't completely compatible, but I just don't see enough revenue being taken in by the government to somehow float the majority of the population not doing anything.
 

AngryGerbil

AntiBad Activist
<Donors Crew>
13,890
Reactions
15,920 1,023 0 0
#13
I believe that more than likely, we'll just end up doing other shit for work.
Yep.

Once plug n' play plants and warp drives are possible, the population will expand to fill the population potential and the work we do will be to contest each other over space and favor. We will always find ways to differentiate ourselves if only to satisfy the sexual imperative. Unless we are talking some ultra-totalitarian mega-government that controls every aspect of life including movement and sex. In which case my mega-great grandson will differentiate himself by destroying your unnatural and inhuman systematized totalitarian application of top-down group selection and free the animals trapped in your unholy hell of 'post-scarcity'.

But I actually don't think I even believe in the entire concept of 'post-scarcity' so my mega-great grandson will probably just have to fight against regular old run-of-the-mill Commies, and not Ultra Space Commies.

Besides, animals who are fed for free and have nothing to do can not be said to be healthy in my opinion.
 

radditsu

Lord Nagafen Raider
4,676
0
Reactions
812 363 0 0
#14
We just have to be flexible when it comes to what we define as "successful" in our economy. More esoteric things like entertainment and arts and what education we deem useful will have to be defined in our culture to create opportunity for more diverse skill sets than "build thing".
 

hodj

Vox Populi Jihadi
<Donors Crew>
24,852
5d 14h 35m
Reactions
7,481 1,644 0 0
#16
Amod, please fix this thread title to "Isn't" rather than "Aren't", and then please shaw this thread and the retard that made it as it is shit.
 

TrollfaceDeux

The Slayer Supreme of the Thousand Shadowban
<Donors Crew>
16,133
0
Reactions
6,997 2,149 0 0
#17
I predict wooly's age to be 18.
 

Woolygimp

Knight of the Realm
1,614
0
Reactions
319 44 0 0
#18
We already have examples of post-scarcity economies in history, idiots. Rome was a post-scarcity society. They handed out grain to all of the cities inhabitants, who were largely unemployed, and gave them free access to games that cost the state massive amounts of money. Bread and Circuses.

All the land was owned by the elite, all the labor done by slaves and soldiers. They literally had nothing to do except eat, sleep, and fuck, which they did.

Replace slaves and soldiers in that example with robots. Same thing. We'll have free food and media (to keep us entertained). In fact, there's a solution to the Fermi Paradox that states that once a society reaches a certain level, they stop expanding because they get far more enjoyment about of virtual reality. Basically, at a certain point anything they can do in real life can be -perfectly- replicated in a virtual environment, so there's no fucking point to actually living life.

Think about it. You want to enlist in Starfleet for adventure/exploration? Why? They can create an even more adventurous Galaxy for you to explore, while you don't risk your life when your anti-matter/warp engine inexplicably explodes like it does in every episode. Think about whatever you dreamed you want to be. You could do it, without the risk of death.

It actually makes sense as a solution to the Fermi Paradox. Why expand or conquer the Universe when you can literally do everything in virtual reality without having to die. The only reason to expand is redundancy, should your planet suffer a catastrophic disaster. But not enough to expand past a few solar systems.

That's the future.
 
Last edited:

Scoresby

Lord Nagafen Raider
335
4d 18h 27m
Reactions
402 113 0 0
#19
I think their could be some truth to this. The interesting problem for me is how our financial systems are based around lending with the expectation of interest on return. Profit largely driven by volume of sales, which drives consumption (requiring raw materials and energy). Humanity also does a piss-poor job of population control; instinct to procreate is a mother-fucker. So I predict a much more catastrophic collapse before we reach some utopia where tech will do our jobs for us. Energy/raw material as well as food shortages will drive wars the likes we have not seen. We aren't smart enough to get there as a species!

Like a less-extreme version of "The Mote in God's Eye".