Tags: BETH DITTO FUCKBOT, Salma Hayek is hot [ Add Tags ]
[ Return to General Discussion | Reply to Topic ] |
CyborgJesus | Posted: Jun 30, 2010 - 22:52 |
| ||||
Level: 6 CS Original | "Who produces the materials? Who makes the paint? Who makes the brushes?" Just to state my point again: I was talking about a moneyless society that might arise after 2-3 more changes in global socioeconomic systems. E.g., from Capitalism to Examplism to Forinstancism to Dontcomeupwithawordism to moneyless society. I think we'd see a shift from using physical materials to using energy and information, i.e., digital animations and that sort of stuff, much much sooner. | |||||
#151 | [ Top | Reply to Topic ] |
Nanos | Posted: Jul 01, 2010 - 01:23 |
| ||||
Level: 0 CS Original | > without money, there's no way to create incentives in accordance with supply This aspect concerns me greatly, as at the moment, the more I look into money, the more it seems the only way to solve this problem so to speak, eg. pay more wages for jobs that are short of people. But that would mean you would risk getting people into jobs, not because they want to do them, but because they want, or need the money.. (Need, like say they have gamblering debts..) But I suppose if everyone at least has a basic standard of living for free, and you still pay folk more for jobs no one is keen on doing, such as cleaning drains (One of my favourite examples, as in my experience, no one wants to do that job.. as noted where I live, I'm the only one that bothers to fix the drains when the garden starts to flood with raw sewage..) then they will get done, and things will be better than they are now at least. | |||||
#152 | [ Top | Reply to Topic ] |
Agent Matt | Posted: Jul 01, 2010 - 09:01 |
| ||||
Genuine American Monster Level: 70 CS Original | "Just to state my point again: I was talking about a moneyless society that might arise after 2-3 more changes in global socioeconomic systems. E.g., from Capitalism to Examplism to Forinstancism to Dontcomeupwithawordism to moneyless society." http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/special-pleading.html | |||||
#153 | [ Top | Reply to Topic ] |
domokato | Posted: Jul 01, 2010 - 18:45 |
| ||||
Level: 4 CS Original |
Fucking ROBOTS. It's the FUTURE Anyway, my actual point was that people would still have motivation to do certain things, especially artistic things. But I agree the resources won't be there if an RBE was implemented today in its current conception | |||||
#154 | [ Top | Reply to Topic ] |
domokato | Posted: Jul 01, 2010 - 18:48 |
| ||||
Level: 4 CS Original |
You know, you keep saying that, and I read that page, but I still don't understand how you think the various things you're calling special pleading are actually special pleading? | |||||
#155 | [ Top | Reply to Topic ] |
Agent Matt | Posted: Jul 01, 2010 - 19:00 |
| ||||
Genuine American Monster Level: 70 CS Original | http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Special_pleading</p> Special Pleading is a formal logical fallacy where a participant demands special considerations for a particular premise of theirs. Usually this is because in order for their argument to work, they need to provide some way to get out of logical consistency. Therefore, they introduce a "special case" or an exception to their rules - while this is acceptable in genuine special cases, it becomes a formal fallacy when a person doesn't adequately justify why the case is special. ----- Their definition is better for this particular context. Cyborg's statement requires a special case, because it requires me to disregard everything I know about history and humanity. But he never states why his case is special and why such disregard is deserved. He only says what he thinks will happen. You are right that Nikzor was a piss-poor choice to make the point. | |||||
#156 | [ Top | Reply to Topic ] |
Ed | Posted: Jul 01, 2010 - 20:40 |
| ||||
Level: 10 CS Original |
Arty projects and volunteer projects I can see being done, but the problem comes when an art project requires a COLLABORATION of people being led by - potentially - one person. It requires that that one person convince everyone they want to work with them AND also that they be comfortable with their roles and not answer back. THAT is very, very different. And then theres the other issue of scarcity in art, as I have said many times. In a project like a film its even worse, its not just one piece of art you want, you want LOTS. You want specific composer to score your film? You want a specific actor to be in your film? You want a specific writer or director to be in your film? You want a specific set designer to be in your film? etc. etc. Well thats going to be even harder, not only do you need to find a large amount of people agreeing to take orders to fulfil your vision, but you want to find SPECIFICALLY talented people. The theoretical basis of this society is that scarcity does not exist, but the point is that scarcity will always exist even if we had hypothetically conquered material scarcity. And the reason given here that all of what I said would be possible is because they would all be too bored with lying around all day and would jump at the chance to do anything?? Even if we accept that ridiculous assumption, because scarcity for specific art would still exist the people most VALUABLE would have plenty to do and so would be very unlikely be lying around all day doing nothing SO bored that they will take whatever bollocks is thrown at them. So essentially what we would have is a similar situation to what we have now. The people with talent get work and the ones lying around not doing anything probably don't and so aren't in demand. The moral of this story is that in this situation people would still be valuable, scarcity would still exist and therefore a form of barter would be required somehow and so some people would be more wealthy than others. So once again you would have a social stratification. This system cannot possibly work even if you allow all material scarcity to be removed from the equation, since it cant and can never get to that point this is a rather moot point anyway. I mention it because if it fails even when giving it utopian technologies then its clearly doomed to fail. | |||||
#157 | [ Top | Reply to Topic ] |
Genogza | Posted: Jul 01, 2010 - 20:54 |
| ||||
Life's Too Short Level: 1 CS Original | Hypothetically though, Ed. If we're talking about a society with that much technology, what you said about film wouldn't really apply. Computers and innovative CGI would/could probably fill every single role you've stated. Actors included. And if you're an Artist doing your art just for the sake of it, with no incentive for financial gain, then what and why would you ask for anything return? And we're not including the evolved mindset of humans at this time. Outside of our natural values, it is society that plays a large role in what we would value. Granted this is clearly speculation and opinion. | |||||
#158 | [ Top | Reply to Topic ] |
Agent Matt | Posted: Jul 01, 2010 - 20:58 |
| ||||
Genuine American Monster Level: 70 CS Original | In what world are artists programmers? | |||||
#159 | [ Top | Reply to Topic ] |
sorry | Posted: Jul 01, 2010 - 20:58 |
| ||||
Level: 12 CS Original | This one. They create art every day. | |||||
#160 | [ Top | Reply to Topic ] |
Agent Matt | Posted: Jul 01, 2010 - 21:00 |
| ||||
Genuine American Monster Level: 70 CS Original | Oh yeah, the world where we eat shrooms and become magically transformed into ubermensch. Thanks so much, McKenna. | |||||
#161 | [ Top | Reply to Topic ] |
sorry | Posted: Jul 01, 2010 - 21:01 |
| ||||
Level: 12 CS Original | yummy | |||||
#162 | [ Top | Reply to Topic ] |
Genogza | Posted: Jul 01, 2010 - 21:01 |
| ||||
Life's Too Short Level: 1 CS Original | The imaginary Utopia we're talking about. Of course this is all speculation and opinion though. I would think that if you were to grow up in this futuristic society, you'd know how to work the computers. | |||||
#163 | [ Top | Reply to Topic ] |
Agent Matt | Posted: Jul 01, 2010 - 21:02 |
| ||||
Genuine American Monster Level: 70 CS Original | What is the point of even thinking about such things? Why not just read a William Gibson book? His fiction is way better than this RBE stuff. | |||||
#164 | [ Top | Reply to Topic ] |
Genogza | Posted: Jul 01, 2010 - 21:04 |
| ||||
Life's Too Short Level: 1 CS Original | I'm a writer, homey. Imagination/speculation/discussion about these things do wonders for perception. Especially on how others feel about these kind of subjects. And I think I will give him a read. Just finished World War Z. That book was amazing. | |||||
#165 | [ Top | Reply to Topic ] |
Agent Matt | Posted: Jul 01, 2010 - 21:06 |
| ||||
Genuine American Monster Level: 70 CS Original | You'd probably like Jeff Noon and Rudy Rucker too. Perhaps that's why I hate RBE. Its bad science fiction. There's no coherent plot. | |||||
#166 | [ Top | Reply to Topic ] |
Genogza | Posted: Jul 01, 2010 - 21:08 |
| ||||
Life's Too Short Level: 1 CS Original | >>Perhaps that's why I hate RBE. Its bad science fiction. There's no coherent plot.<< Now this I completely agree with. | |||||
#167 | [ Top | Reply to Topic ] |
Ed | Posted: Jul 01, 2010 - 21:16 |
| ||||
Level: 10 CS Original |
Once again you've missed the point. If you're a really great composer and I want you for my film how do I go about that? What do you do when there is still wealth and value and scarcity in a society where those things shouldnt exist?What happens when your talented mean you are so in demand you become powerful by accident? The only way it can work is it all art is thought to be meaningless in such a society and all our human values destroyed. And btw CGI also still needs an artist. You know this kind of argument makes me realise that people that defend a RBE or moneyless society like Fresco really have no understanding of why people want to create art, so here have no real idea what goes into making a film. Im a composer and I dont think anything Ive done is at all art, but I know it would all be meaningless if I knew all music was just a soulless creation of a computer program. Oh sure we have synths and samples that can sound great but you still have a human programming them. Im sure people like Fresco would not have any understanding of this. | |||||
#168 | [ Top | Reply to Topic ] |
sorry | Posted: Jul 01, 2010 - 21:19 |
| ||||
Level: 12 CS Original | Ed, it might be because none of this is important [to Fresco]. His main concern is removing hierarchical class structures and getting primary resources to everyone. | |||||
#169 | [ Top | Reply to Topic ] |
Ed | Posted: Jul 01, 2010 - 21:20 |
| ||||
Level: 10 CS Original | Aaron, I like the idea of it too, but I also realised it cant work. | |||||
#170 | [ Top | Reply to Topic ] |
sorry | Posted: Jul 01, 2010 - 21:21 |
| ||||
Level: 12 CS Original | Sadly, me too. | |||||
#171 | [ Top | Reply to Topic ] |
CyborgJesus | Posted: Jul 01, 2010 - 21:25 |
| ||||
Level: 6 CS Original |
I still don't get what this has to do with barter. If consumer goods are free, bartering makes no sense. If you want people to play in your movie, you'll access some kind of database with all artists, invite them into your project and either they'll join or they won't. If you don't get them, you'll have to look for somebody else. Not that different than dating is today, or finding friends. Personally, I only work on artistic projects with people I like, not because they have money. If they have both, great, but I'd rather work on an interesting project with a poor guy than on a dull project with a rich schmuck. | |||||
#172 | [ Top | Reply to Topic ] |
Agent Matt | Posted: Jul 01, 2010 - 21:33 |
| ||||
Genuine American Monster Level: 70 CS Original | The idea that consumer goods would not cost money makes no sense, as money allows more efficient distribution of goods and services. Removing money would be inefficient, thus being regression rather than progression. | |||||
#173 | [ Top | Reply to Topic ] |
Ed | Posted: Jul 01, 2010 - 21:42 |
| ||||
Level: 10 CS Original |
Yes it does, because since there is a need for bartering you would have to turn to other UNIQUE ITEMS OR SERVICES to fulfil that need. I hate to use the caps button like a CT but Ive said this over and over again. The point is that this would happen because there would be a NEED. You are not accepting what I am talking about is scarcity.
What if you really want them? Then you might feel like you want to offer them something. Imagine that its not people, imagine its material goods. But material goods that cannot ever be replicated. These are unique items and that is why they are valuable. The idea in this society is that there will be no need for money as all scarcity is removed, so there will be no need to barter, and yet here we are with valuable unique items that people want. What do you think will happen then?
But that of course is not business. This is more like trying to paint a picture but where you have to convince all the colours to want allow you use them or you have to use some crap alternative.
Why is it so black and white with you? Why is it you either like someone or they are are a "rich schmuck". | |||||
#174 | [ Top | Reply to Topic ] |
Genogza | Posted: Jul 01, 2010 - 21:54 |
| ||||
Life's Too Short Level: 1 CS Original | ------------ I still don't get what this has to do with barter. If consumer goods are free, bartering makes no sense. Yes it does, because since there is a need for bartering you would have to turn to other UNIQUE ITEMS OR SERVICES to fulfil that need. I hate to use the caps button like a CT but Ive said this over and over again. The point is that this would happen because there would be a NEED. You are not accepting what I am talking about is scarcity. If you want people to play in your movie, you'll access some kind of database with all artists, invite them into your project and either they'll join or they won't. If you don't get them, you'll have to look for somebody else. What if you really want them? Then you might feel like you want to offer them something. Imagine that its not people, imagine its material goods. But material goods that cannot ever be replicated. These are unique items and that is why they are valuable. The idea in this society is that there will be no need for money as all scarcity is removed, so there will be no need to barter, and yet here we are with valuable unique items that people want. Not that different than dating is today, or finding friends. But that of course is not business. This is more like trying to paint a picture but where you have to convince all the colours to want allow you use them or you have to use some crap alternative.--------- Ed, I agree, and completely understand where you're coming from. I have actually worked on small films, as well as computer avi's and short cartoons, so I understand the perspective you're trying to give. On the other hand, the major flaw in this is that money can't and doesn't buy anything and everything. Free will, will always win. Even in today's society, especially in the field of art and film, if an actor or artist doesn't want to work with you or for you, there's nothing you can do about it. It's like I said in an earlier thread: People want to be better then other people, instead of people wanting to be better then themselves. Which is what most RBE's that I've read about is/are trying to accomplish. | |||||
#175 | [ Top | Reply to Topic ] |
Agent Matt | Posted: Jul 01, 2010 - 21:55 |
| ||||
Genuine American Monster Level: 70 CS Original | "Free will, will always win." Soup kitchens are free. Do you eat there? | |||||
#176 | [ Top | Reply to Topic ] |
Ed | Posted: Jul 01, 2010 - 22:00 |
| ||||
Level: 10 CS Original |
True, but there's plenty of smaller roles that you can never replace with a computer or robots or you take all meaning from it in the first place. It is true that if someone doesnt want to work for you you're still screwed no matter how much money you have. Of course I could say that everyone has their price, I could also say that business is business even if you like working with people you do behave differently when you are being paid. And what Im trying to say with all these examples is that in EITHER situation you will want to barter, today its with money. In this hypothetical society we're talking about, it would have to be with something else. The point is the NEED would still be there, SCARCITY would still exist, VALUE would still exist and WEALTH would still exist. EDIT: Even in a society where hypothetically all material scarcity was gone. | |||||
#177 | [ Top | Reply to Topic ] |
Genogza | Posted: Jul 01, 2010 - 22:01 |
| ||||
Life's Too Short Level: 1 CS Original | Matt, if the soup is good. Ed, no argument there. Agreed. The only real way I could think of to completely eliminate that, would to become a collective, which I don't think any sane person would want. | |||||
#178 | [ Top | Reply to Topic ] |
Agent Matt | Posted: Jul 01, 2010 - 22:02 |
| ||||
Genuine American Monster Level: 70 CS Original | I don't believe you. Unless you are literally referring to any kitchen that makes soup. I am referring to: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soup_kitchen | |||||
#179 | [ Top | Reply to Topic ] |
Genogza | Posted: Jul 01, 2010 - 22:06 |
| ||||
Life's Too Short Level: 1 CS Original | I was joking. Unless of course they were serving kale soup, and I was starving. | |||||
#180 | [ Top | Reply to Topic ] |