Advertisement

How many of you would be interested in starting our own nation?

Started by January 01, 2012 06:09 PM
94 comments, last by swiftcoder 12 years, 10 months ago

[quote name='Eelco' timestamp='1325791053' post='4900064']
[quote name='SteveDeFacto' timestamp='1325790107' post='4900061']
[quote name='Eelco' timestamp='1325789644' post='4900053']
Rounding up the humans it the least of your problem: what are you going to do about the cancer that is Antartic Krill? Or ants?

http://en.wikipedia....#Global_biomass

Or what exactly is your beef with homo sapiens? Is it the only species that refuses to yield to your charms?


Antartic Krill and ants may over populate one area then they run out of food and die off. Humans are not susceptible to this and will continue to consume until there is really nothing left anywhere.
[/quote]
Not susceptible to this? Sure enough, there may be quantitative differences, but humans have need for resources, and if they can not get their hands on enough of them, then they will die.

Perhaps the evolution of intelligence will be as ecologically disruptive as the evolution of photosynthesis, but so what? You cant stop the future. Or are you going to hold the cyanobacteria accountable for their crimes against ecology as well?
[/quote]

The difference is that we are intelligent and have the ability to stop reproducing. The world does not need to end in complete destruction.
[/quote]

Dont be preposterous; we have nothing resembling the ability to stop reproducing. You might as well command the cyanobacteria to stop reproducing; it would have the same effect: none at all. Despite that, the cyanobacteria failed to end the world in complete destruction, even though they played a quite more radical trick on the planet than adding a bit of CO2 to it.

[quote name='SteveDeFacto' timestamp='1325791433' post='4900065']
[quote name='Eelco' timestamp='1325791053' post='4900064']
[quote name='SteveDeFacto' timestamp='1325790107' post='4900061']
[quote name='Eelco' timestamp='1325789644' post='4900053']
Rounding up the humans it the least of your problem: what are you going to do about the cancer that is Antartic Krill? Or ants?

http://en.wikipedia....#Global_biomass

Or what exactly is your beef with homo sapiens? Is it the only species that refuses to yield to your charms?


Antartic Krill and ants may over populate one area then they run out of food and die off. Humans are not susceptible to this and will continue to consume until there is really nothing left anywhere.
[/quote]
Not susceptible to this? Sure enough, there may be quantitative differences, but humans have need for resources, and if they can not get their hands on enough of them, then they will die.

Perhaps the evolution of intelligence will be as ecologically disruptive as the evolution of photosynthesis, but so what? You cant stop the future. Or are you going to hold the cyanobacteria accountable for their crimes against ecology as well?
[/quote]

The difference is that we are intelligent and have the ability to stop reproducing. The world does not need to end in complete destruction.
[/quote]

Dont be preposterous; we have nothing resembling the ability to stop reproducing. You might as well command the cyanobacteria to stop reproducing; it would have the same effect: none at all. Despite that, the cyanobacteria failed to end the world in complete destruction, even though they played a quite more radical trick on the planet than adding a bit of CO2 to it.
[/quote]

CO2 is the least of our problems. I think in desperation for resources we will be the instrument of our own destruction along side every other living organism.
Advertisement

[quote name='kseh' timestamp='1325783814' post='4900014']
Near as I can tell, adversity is something that is needed in society. We need something to fight against or to overcome. Without it humans have no reason to try to adapt or change things to increase their odds of survival. And of course, too much of it also decreases our odds of survival. If the premice behind creating a nation is to remove elements of adversity (particularily ones that make you uncomfortable in the society you currently live in), you are ultimately creating a weakness (inability to adapt to adversity) which will lead back to the problems that you were trying to escape in the first place. This is why "evil" exists and why it must constantly be fought.

Further, I can't help but point out that it kinda sounds as though you have this design document for a massively multiplayer society simulation and all you need is the programmers to bring it to life. I'm sorry but I have my own worlds that I'd like to create and experiment with and you will probably find it to be the same with other programmers. It'd be best if you first experiment with something on a smaller scale to learn the fundamental skills and dynamics involved in this industry and be prepared to continuously learn new things as technology and paradigms evolve.


I agree adversity is a dreaded but necessary fact of life. However, you have only stated what I have been trying to explain all along. As I see it the earth is a living system in which all organisms are interdependent on each other. Trees produce oxygen, bacteria in the ocean maintain the proper pH balance to support life, and predators keep prey from reproducing infinitely and stripping the land barren. Each organism makes up a cell in the entire living system we call earth. Unfortunately, one type of cell has mutated and the systems of regulation which apply to every other cell to prevent it from reproducing beyond what can be sustainable has been broken. In other words humans have become the cancer of the earth. The system will collapse and we will all die with it.

As for my project I see little how that has to do with this topic, and I've already come to the conclusion you have stated. At this point I have little interest in finding help and will continue to work on it alone no matter how in vain my attempts may be.
[/quote]

No comment on any other programming projects you may be working on was intended. What I meant by that last bit was an attempt to politely, yet with a hint of humour, decline your offer to join your society while sugesting that rather than trying to start with something big like forming a nation maybe starting something smaller like on the scale of a local community. I was trying draw a metaphor likening this idea of creating a nation to the ambitous plans of a beginner programer who wants to build an MMO with no experience behind him and only needs a few programmers to help realise his vision. I would hope that you can see the similarities and the humour.

If your over all concern is about the well being of life on the planet, it seems to me that you would have a smaller chance of affecting a change to avert global disaster by breaking away from existing centers of power than if you were to work from within them. If it's easy to become a politician then do it and effect a real change.

CO2 is the least of our problems. I think in desperation for resources we will be the instrument of our own destruction along side every other living organism.

All organisms are desperate for resources, Ants and cyanobacteria included.

If wed want to get close to the notoriety of the cyanobacteria, wed have to do something chemically equally spectacular, like fill the entire atmosphere with 20% chlorine gas, permanently. Now that would fuck over the biosphere pretty good, just like oxygen did, like a 99.99% species reduction or something. But still that wouldnt be the end of life on earth.

Cutting down some trees and harpooning some whales is peanuts relative to that, and no different from the disruption other successful organisms caused during their rise, like ants.

Sorry, the end of the world is not nigh; you are going to have to find another rationalization for your attempted career as a bond-villain.

[quote name='SteveDeFacto' timestamp='1325786416' post='4900034']
[quote name='kseh' timestamp='1325783814' post='4900014']
Near as I can tell, adversity is something that is needed in society. We need something to fight against or to overcome. Without it humans have no reason to try to adapt or change things to increase their odds of survival. And of course, too much of it also decreases our odds of survival. If the premice behind creating a nation is to remove elements of adversity (particularily ones that make you uncomfortable in the society you currently live in), you are ultimately creating a weakness (inability to adapt to adversity) which will lead back to the problems that you were trying to escape in the first place. This is why "evil" exists and why it must constantly be fought.

Further, I can't help but point out that it kinda sounds as though you have this design document for a massively multiplayer society simulation and all you need is the programmers to bring it to life. I'm sorry but I have my own worlds that I'd like to create and experiment with and you will probably find it to be the same with other programmers. It'd be best if you first experiment with something on a smaller scale to learn the fundamental skills and dynamics involved in this industry and be prepared to continuously learn new things as technology and paradigms evolve.


I agree adversity is a dreaded but necessary fact of life. However, you have only stated what I have been trying to explain all along. As I see it the earth is a living system in which all organisms are interdependent on each other. Trees produce oxygen, bacteria in the ocean maintain the proper pH balance to support life, and predators keep prey from reproducing infinitely and stripping the land barren. Each organism makes up a cell in the entire living system we call earth. Unfortunately, one type of cell has mutated and the systems of regulation which apply to every other cell to prevent it from reproducing beyond what can be sustainable has been broken. In other words humans have become the cancer of the earth. The system will collapse and we will all die with it.

As for my project I see little how that has to do with this topic, and I've already come to the conclusion you have stated. At this point I have little interest in finding help and will continue to work on it alone no matter how in vain my attempts may be.
[/quote]

No comment on any other programming projects you may be working on was intended. What I meant by that last bit was an attempt to politely, yet with a hint of humour, decline your offer to join your society while sugesting that rather than trying to start with something big like forming a nation maybe starting something smaller like on the scale of a local community. I was trying draw a metaphor likening this idea of creating a nation to the ambitous plans of a beginner programer who wants to build an MMO with no experience behind him and only needs a few programmers to help realise his vision. I would hope that you can see the similarities and the humour.

If your over all concern is about the well being of life on the planet, it seems to me that you would have a smaller chance of affecting a change to avert global disaster by breaking away from existing centers of power than if you were to work from within them. If it's easy to become a politician then do it and effect a real change.
[/quote]

Actually, my concerns are with the survival of mankind. I care little about the lesser organisms which will inevitably be whipped out by an unforeseen natural disaster such as an asteroid or most likely mankind. I would like to see mankind eventually move to the stars but at this rate I don't think that day will ever come. I see little investment in our space program and as resources become tighter this problem is only getting worse. My hope is that by gathering the worlds greatest minds and enabling them to make real changes we can escape the fate of this world and all who inhabit it.

My hope is that by gathering the worlds greatest minds and enabling them to make real changes we can escape the fate of this world and all who inhabit it.

How did we make it to the Moon? We gathered some of the world's greatest minds together, and enabled them to make real changes.

Did we have to start a massive eugenics project to make this happen? No, we just had to be afraid that the Soviets might make it to the Moon before we did.

I really don't get why you feel that eugenics is the only way to make smart people work. I guess it could work as a fear motivator: make X amount of progress on an FTL drive, or we'll kill off your kids for not being smarter? But it doesn't have any applicability beyond that. The fact that there are lots of poor/uneducated people in the world doesn't in any way hinder the intelligentsia from building things...

Tristam MacDonald. Ex-BigTech Software Engineer. Future farmer. [https://trist.am]

Advertisement

[quote name='SteveDeFacto' timestamp='1325793758' post='4900085']
My hope is that by gathering the worlds greatest minds and enabling them to make real changes we can escape the fate of this world and all who inhabit it.

How did we make it to the Moon? We gathered some of the world's greatest minds together, and enabled them to make real changes.

Did we have to start a massive eugenics project to make this happen? No, we just had to be afraid that the Soviets might make it to the Moon before we did.

I really don't get why you feel that eugenics is the only way to make smart people work. I guess it could work as a fear motivator: make X amount of progress on an FTL drive, or we'll kill off your kids for not being smarter? But it doesn't have any applicability beyond that. The fact that there are lots of poor/uneducated people in the world doesn't in any way hinder the intelligentsia from building things...
[/quote]

How does eugenics have anything to do with what I've said? I simply offered it as a possible solution to a question which was asked much earlier.

How does eugenics have anything to do with what I've said? I simply offered it as a possible solution to a question which was asked much earlier.

Far be it from me to put words in your mouth, but the discussion of eugenics has absorbed 3 pages of thread now, starting with your statement that you were "thinking forced sterilization, abortion or deportation" - all of which are explicit forms of discrimination/genocide based on eugenics.

But it in a more subtle vein, it also seems that you have suggested several times, that you believe we can draw a line demarking the 'thinkers' from the 'breeders', and that the 'breeders' are detrimental to human progress. That right there is eugenics - and while you may personally not take it further than that, it is a very few 'political expediences' away from forced deportation and concentration camps...

Tristam MacDonald. Ex-BigTech Software Engineer. Future farmer. [https://trist.am]


[quote name='SteveDeFacto' timestamp='1325795348' post='4900092']
How does eugenics have anything to do with what I've said? I simply offered it as a possible solution to a question which was asked much earlier.

Far be it from me to put words in your mouth, but the discussion of eugenics has absorbed 3 pages of thread now, starting with your statement that you were "thinking forced sterilization, abortion or deportation" - all of which are explicit forms of discrimination/genocide based on eugenics.

But it in a more subtle vein, it also seems that you have suggested several times, that you believe we can draw a line demarking the 'thinkers' from the 'breeders', and that the 'breeders' are detrimental to human progress. That right there is eugenics - and while you may personally not take it further than that, it is a very few 'political expediences' away from forced deportation and concentration camps...
[/quote]

Fair enough but the only reason it has been three pages is because Antheus has been intentionally directing the conversation towards such topics. I only suggested it because I see no other solution for the question which was asked. I have no doubt that will be the solution america will resort to when the population reaches such a critical mass as china's population has.

Fair enough but the only reason it has been three pages is because Antheus has been intentionally directing the conversation towards such topics.


Nope. I merely wanted to know how it would be different from Fourth Reich.

I only suggested it because I see no other solution for the question which was asked.[/quote]

Which is disturbing. Especially considered thinly veiled theme of the subject since the very beginning, which clearly establishes a superior and inferior population.

I have no doubt that will be the solution america will resort to when the population reaches such a critical mass as china's population has.[/quote]

You have an unhealthy obsession with this concept of overpopulation. It's not a real problem. It only becomes a matter of discussion when it's used as red herring to cover for real intents.


If your local grocery store makes you uncomfortable, shop elsewhere. Move to another city, country. That is the first solution anyone should ever consider. It's simply unacceptable to ever under any circumstances think of population control as means of solving anything. But going from running across someone who doesn't fit your beauty standards towards eugenics or deportation is sick.

You might also note that China never implemented any of the ideas you suggested. So calling upon eugenics or deportation is again not a reasonable conclusion. Yet it seems to be the only idea you're focused on. Getting rid of people - not improving life or society.

Even being stuck in a space ship with oxygen running out, one would expect either a popular vote or a voluntary sacrifice.

This topic is closed to new replies.

Advertisement