Its a totalitarian's wet dream. Everytime humans sought after creating heaven on earth...it created a living hell...this is the biggest lesson of the 20th century in my opinion.
To me, this project is a high-tech form of Marxism.
Imo, it's anything but totalitarian if it's a mix of voluntaryism in part of a gig / sharing-economy as a precursor before the shift. Armchair theorising is saying that abundance will flip the concept of money on its head. And yes it's quite like high-tech communism, and IMO perhaps part of decentralisation is the ability can accommodate many different systems with people participating freely without the capacity for any of these to be state-enforced by coercion. Would be interesting to see how their ideas may change for the better after getting some crypto enlightenment :)
How can you do that decentralized without property or ownership? Someone has to b doing the distribution. It will be centralized into a super computer AI controlled by who? A few high-tech technocrats.
Maybe the distribution can be handled by the consensus of a distributed network instead of an AI or elected official. It's a far out idea, but I think the theory is solid. Everyone would have to believe in the resource based economy, otherwise people would still game and corrupt the system.
@camb At least they don't get drag behind the woodshed for a bullet in the head. Also, did you know that today some 18,000 children who in the past would have died of simple diseases will survive, about 300,000 people will gain electricity and a cool 250,000 will graduate from extreme poverty? (source) How terrible the ability of people to own and direct the factors of production is!
I've listened to Bad Quaker's podcast. Nothing there apart from "it's pure socialism with computers, baaad!". Well, it's not that simple. Computers are the key difference, that's one thing. Second thing, isn't non-aggression principle embedded deeply in that philosophy? And the third thing is private property. My toothbrush is obviously mine. So is my house. My car. Etc. Maybe I missed something, but the official message is that people will want to give up their cars, if the goal is simply to get from point A to B and public transport is superior to individual cars?
Well it doesn't have to be that way, and could use more public discussion. Indeed it's the biggest off-putting part of the whole idea.
Its a totalitarian's wet dream. Everytime humans sought after creating heaven on earth...it created a living hell...this is the biggest lesson of the 20th century in my opinion.
To me, this project is a high-tech form of Marxism.
Imo, it's anything but totalitarian if it's a mix of voluntaryism in part of a gig / sharing-economy as a precursor before the shift. Armchair theorising is saying that abundance will flip the concept of money on its head. And yes it's quite like high-tech communism, and IMO perhaps part of decentralisation is the ability can accommodate many different systems with people participating freely without the capacity for any of these to be state-enforced by coercion. Would be interesting to see how their ideas may change for the better after getting some crypto enlightenment :)
It could be planned in a decentralized way, with distributed networking and consensus. (in theory)
How can you do that decentralized without property or ownership? Someone has to b doing the distribution. It will be centralized into a super computer AI controlled by who? A few high-tech technocrats.
Maybe the distribution can be handled by the consensus of a distributed network instead of an AI or elected official. It's a far out idea, but I think the theory is solid. Everyone would have to believe in the resource based economy, otherwise people would still game and corrupt the system.
Just like in communism, you know what happens to those who dont agree with the program.
You definitely have a point there. But we also see what happens with capitalism and people that don't agree with the program.
@camb At least they don't get drag behind the woodshed for a bullet in the head. Also, did you know that today some 18,000 children who in the past would have died of simple diseases will survive, about 300,000 people will gain electricity and a cool 250,000 will graduate from extreme poverty? (source) How terrible the ability of people to own and direct the factors of production is!
I've listened to Bad Quaker's podcast. Nothing there apart from "it's pure socialism with computers, baaad!". Well, it's not that simple. Computers are the key difference, that's one thing. Second thing, isn't non-aggression principle embedded deeply in that philosophy? And the third thing is private property. My toothbrush is obviously mine. So is my house. My car. Etc. Maybe I missed something, but the official message is that people will want to give up their cars, if the goal is simply to get from point A to B and public transport is superior to individual cars?