[ExI] Vision, people. Vision!
rolandodegilead at gmail.com
Sat Jun 22 01:08:47 UTC 2013
First of all: Sorry for my english. I am a Spanish student of English and I
make a lot of mistakes. I try to improve myself everyday.
Now, related to the topic:
I am not a communist, but, on the very first day an IA rises, there are two
possible ways to follow:
With private property: Business owners buy some IA´s and they don´t need
employees anymore, so unemployment get closer to 100% and poor people
(mainly everybody) can´t defend themselves because IA army is not
defeatable. An existencial risk
Without private property: Government have a IA for each person. They
collect the money and distribute it amongst the citizens, so people don´t
have to work never ever, so they could use all their lifes to study.
Related to abolitionism. A Transhumanist socialism (¿Transocialism? ¿S+?)
In ¿50? years IA will be developed. In 70 a country will finish the
deployment of a Transhumanist socialism. In 71 all the other countries will
pay homage to them
On Fri, Jun 21, 2013 at 8:08 PM, Dennis May <dennislmay at yahoo.com> wrote:
> Anders Sandberg wrote: [Mon May 20 08:26:13 UTC 2013]
> "I have been thinking about mid-term strategic goals for a while now.
> ...achieving transhumanist aims requires getting involved in what can only
> be called politics."
> "One approach might of course be to try for coming up with new, even more
> radical ideas. [...] Blowing minds attracts the swarmers and seekers, while
> repelling the doers and mainstream."
> "Another approach is to focus. [...] Having people actually work out
> projects or theories in detail and getting supporters bringing them
> about or spreading the knowledge does matter."
> "A third way, which I think has not happened much yet, is to deliberately
> look for a new transhumanist vision. [...] But where is the next liminal
> appearing? We want to be there and seed it.
> Developing a new vision for transhumanist future requires a correct
> coherent view of which political model successfully generates growing
> economic investment and entrepreneurial creativity in technology.
> That seems to be the debate which has raged since the early years of the
> industrial revolution. My on and off discussions on various lists has lead
> me to believe that either a large minority or in fact the majority of
> people involved in extropy/transhumanism do not possess even a basic
> understanding of the fundamental foundations of economics. That being the
> case most are not prepared to rationally discuss politics or the questions
> related to how do we get there from here.
> That leaves the "doers" and the entrepreneurs to determine the future.
> The extent to which they - and the economy they live in - can escape being
> micro-managed and second guessed by central planners will determine the
> extent and rate of progress.
> Seed money is indeed important in developing the future. The value of
> seed money is inversely proportional to the degree it is micro-managed and
> second guessed by central planners [private or public bean counters].
> Throwing money at difficult problems is a complete waste if the solution is
> top-down rather than allowing creativity and the entrepreneurial spirit to
> work. This simple fact seems to elude the vast majority of people and the
> management in large organizations - understandable since most have never
> been part of the creative process in developing new technology and have
> never understood the damage done by the top-down approach.
> Side note: I've also noticed many extropy/transhumanism supporters
> embracing what I can only call bad science/bad cosmology and politicized
> environmental science. Care needs to be taken before investing so much in
> popular ideas without authentic foundations.
> Dennis May
> extropy-chat mailing list
> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the extropy-chat