Conversation

Notices

1. Disinformation Purveyor :verified_think: (thatguyoverthere@shitposter.club)'s status on Saturday, 17-Jun-2023 06:46:59 JST Disinformation Purveyor :verified_think:

   In any technologically advanced society the individual’s fate MUST depend on decisions that he personally cannot influence to any great extent. A technological society cannot be broken down into small, autonomous communities, because production depends on the cooperation of very large numbers of people and machines. Such a society MUST be highly organized and decisions HAVE TO be made that affect very large numbers of people. When a decision affects, say, a million people, then each of the affected individuals has, on the average, only a one-millionth share in making the decision. What usually happens in practice is that decisions are made by public officials or corporation executives, or by technical specialists, but even when the public votes on a decision the number of voters ordinarily is too large for the vote of any one individual to be significant. [17] Thus most individuals are unable to influence measurably the major decisions that affect their lives. There is no conceivable way to remedy this in a technologically advanced society. The system tries to “solve” this problem by using propaganda to make people WANT the decisions that have been made for them, but even if this “solution” were completely successful in making people feel better, it would be demeaning

   • mike805 (mike805@fosstodon.org)'s status on Saturday, 17-Jun-2023 08:25:26 JST mike805

     in reply to

     @thatguyoverthere In order for that social contract to be valid, it must be voluntary. That means there must be frontiers, where people who don't consent can go and live according to the rules of nature.

     If you don't have frontiers your civilization will eventually choke to death on its own lies. This one is well along.

     Disinformation Purveyor :verified_think: likes this.
   • Niclas Hedhman (niclas@angrytoday.com)'s status on Sunday, 18-Jun-2023 19:33:57 JST Niclas Hedhman

     in reply to

     @thatguyoverthere

     Decisions are not the same as Diktats. Extortion, theft, black-mail, kidnapping and murder are wrong, no matter what. So, if you can't have (I think you can) a "technologically advanced society" without these horrors (i.e. government/State), then to hell with that "advanced society".

     This line of argumentation is a lot like the "who is going to pick the cotton?" argument in early 19th century USA, and in hindsight totally invalid.

     Reject the reasoning that we need a State.

     Disinformation Purveyor :verified_think: likes this.
   • Disinformation Purveyor :verified_think: (thatguyoverthere@shitposter.club)'s status on Sunday, 18-Jun-2023 20:11:15 JST Disinformation Purveyor :verified_think:

     in reply to

     • Niclas Hedhman
     @niclas Just for context - This is from Industrial Society and it's Future. He is not arguing in favor of the State but rather arguing that any highly organized society geared for technological progress will require centralized authority over most of the important decisions. The State plays a role in that, but States are not the only centralization mechanism.
     
     My opinions here are kind of difficult to articulate at present. I will give it a go later in the day if I can find the time.
   • Disinformation Purveyor :verified_think: (thatguyoverthere@shitposter.club)'s status on Sunday, 18-Jun-2023 22:09:58 JST Disinformation Purveyor :verified_think:

     in reply to

     • Hyolobrika
     @Hyolobrika I think the distinction would be drawn on how much it builds on top of existing technologies. While it's true I can automate a good bit of work around the property using electronics, those electronics are not accessible without the social order we have today. It might be possible to decentralize the manufacture of higher technologies, but there are limits on the return on investment when it comes to more advanced stuff.
     
     That all said I personally think it may be possible to transition from a centralized model to a more decentralized one where autonomy is better distributed. The question still remains whether or not we could achieve the same levels of advancement without central planning. I might argue it's not necessary and it may not even be helpful in the greater scheme. If our advancement has to come at the cost of most meaningful autonomy (and general health/well-being) then it isn't worth it IMO.
   • Hyolobrika (hyolobrika@social.fbxl.net)'s status on Sunday, 18-Jun-2023 22:10:01 JST Hyolobrika

     in reply to
     But advanced technology (how do you even rigorously distinguish that from simple technology anyway?) can be used by individuals and small communities as well as factories.
     Think of a small-time gardener's computerised greenhouse vs a factory farm.
     That being said, that technology is still produced in factories.
     Disinformation Purveyor :verified_think: likes this.
   • verified neko :verified::verified::verified::makemeneko: (roboneko@bae.st)'s status on Sunday, 18-Jun-2023 22:43:06 JST verified neko :verified::verified::verified::makemeneko:

     in reply to

     • Hyolobrika
     @thatguyoverthere @Hyolobrika specialization makes for better efficiency and permits more advanced production techniques. how much centralization is too much? only shop in town? only shop in the state? clearly high end fabs at ~one per continent reach an absurd and concerning level
     
     a lot of pharmaceuticals and various industrial chemicals probably aren't realistic to synthesize on a town-by-town basis
     
     a 3D printer designed to be built from and work with 8-bit electronics that can all be fabricated in your garage would be interesting. not that I really *want* to wind my own steppers but it would be neat to have designs that officially made room for doing so
     
     at the end of the day I think it's more about cultural attitude than anything. products that ship with full detail service manuals and wiring diagrams versus products with DRM that are glued together
     
     need to add a new amendment about the right to keep and bear general purpose processors
     Disinformation Purveyor :verified_think: likes this.
   • Disinformation Purveyor :verified_think: (thatguyoverthere@shitposter.club)'s status on Monday, 19-Jun-2023 01:01:31 JST Disinformation Purveyor :verified_think:

     in reply to

     • verified neko :verified::verified::verified::makemeneko:
     • Hyolobrika
     @roboneko @Hyolobrika > specialization
     
     This is an example of what Ted Kaczynski would call a surrogate activity. I agree with you btw, and so would he I think. The question I guess is whether or not we are addressing real needs by creating so many surrogate activities to occupy our time or just creating more problems for ourselves than we can adequately deal with.
     
     > pharma
     
     andthatsagoodthing.mp4
     
     I think we could probably do with a lot less profit motivated pharmacology.
     
     > 3d printer you can actually manufacture at home.
     
     This would be awesome. I like the fact that you can build a good bit of a printer on your own. It would be even cooler if you could build it in such a way that the computer itself could be made in the garage.
     
     > cultural attitude and constitutional protections for access to general technology
     
     :100a:
     
     I think we are in the midst of watching centralized authorities seize control of machine learning in a way that will limit individual access and disadvantage people while allowing corporate and government uses.