[ExI] Inevitability of the Singularity (was Re: To Max, re Natasha and Extropy (Kevin Haskell)

[Samantha Atkins]

On 07/07/2011 02:51 PM, Kelly Anderson wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 6, 2011 at 8:32 AM, Stefano Vaj<stefano.vaj at gmail.com>  wrote:
>> On 5 July 2011 17:55, Kelly Anderson<kellycoinguy at gmail.com>  wrote:
>>> My point is that what people perceive currently to be in their self
>>> interest is unlikely to turn on a dime.
>> I am not sure I understand the idiom, but my point is that perceived
>> self-interest may equally create a "market demand" for Singularity as
>> for regression to paleolithic scenarios...
> An ocean liner cannot turn on a dime, but a Segway can. It refers to
> the speed of change a system is capable of. Economics is not a system
> that can be quickly ditched. We do see some movement away from money
> driven economics in Wiki...Land and the Open Source movement, but
> those are merely growing niches for the moment. I see the market
> demand pushing much more in the direction of the Singularity than in
> the direction of neopaleolithic scenarios.
>

I do not understand the use of paleolithic or neopaleolithic as opposed 
to singularity in this context.  It seems like a rather loose way of 
speaking.  Care to clarify what is meant?  Economics will never be 
ditched in most of its critical components.  There is always the need to 
choose how to utilize less than infinite resources (yes, even 
post-singularity) in a way that gains the most of what is valued.  There 
are always more possible uses for resources than resources.  These 
fundamentals will not go away post-singularity.   Money at its most 
fundamental is a fungible value token.   Hence it is rather crucial in 
any society complex enough to need more than direct barter and gift 
economy.

- samantha