Hey Robert, thanks for your message. About places: the advantage we have
in Catalonia is that we can work with local networks who have political
support and pools of human resources that we can use for support. So the
conflict is always there, but we aim to protect ourself.
We are going to begin industrial fabrication around September, and right
now it's important that we're developing software tools. We're
evaluating economic plans and researching different communities so we
can establish a fair participatory contract (constitution).
http://rfc.zeromq.org/spec:22
If you want to participate, it's still very early days. We welcome
people who have something to offer, to come live and work with us on
projects. If you're not sure about your skills, then it's better to
visit and see where or how you can participate. We've set a 1 year
timeframe before we begin anyway.
Also it's important that we're visible and the places have easy access.
You can find many very nice but isolated places.
On 19/03/14 05:11, Robert Jakob wrote:
> Amir,
>
>
> You gave me quite a bit of homework. Sounds like we're pretty mush on
> the same page. I've been thinking a lot about the monarchy vs modern
> american democracy since we started talking about this and you're right
> that the dichotomy is too simplistic. There isn't a clear better or
> worse, right or wrong, there really is no lesser of two evils. In fact,
> I think the US government is just the corporatization of the monarchy.
> It's quite genius from their perspective, because Bush can start a war
> then Obama can come in and say, "OK, things are going to be different.
> Don't blame me for the last presidents policies." He says, "Give me
> time, I'll fix the economy, close Guantanamo, end the wars, bring the
> troops home, etc..." He wins a Nobel prize for his progressive ideas.
> So time passes, things calm down, people are no longer organized, and
> you see the new guy's policies are just as bad and in most cases worse
> than the previous president. Now six years have gone by and all we can
> do is hope the next one will be better. And so goes the cycle. Of
> course, Hilary Clinton will probably win the next election and we'll be
> just as disappointed. Which is what happens with monarchies, but this
> is on a much smaller time frame. So you're probably right about
> starting a new community altogether.
>
> You weren't kidding when you said this is for me. I would definitely be
> willing to help. If I may suggest a few places also, northern Oregon
> and the big island of Hawaii would be perfect places. They both have
> pretty cheap land, great climate, very rich soil, and plenty of rain. I
> have thought a lot about geodesic dome structures for housing and
> aquaponic gardens for agriculture. You can do a mix of hydroponic,
> aquaponic, and traditional farming to ensure you're not vulnerable to
> drastic changes in climate and mineral deficiencies in the soil. The
> biggest factor would be the local government. If you make everything
> open source you might invite conflicts with big governments and
> corporations. If you're wanting to remain local and quiet like a
> commune, there probably won't be an issue. Oregon and Hawaii would also
> be great because you can use solar for electricity and filter the rain
> water for all plumbing. I could go on and on...
>
> I would like to get more involved and I would be much better suited for
> manual labor than academia. Who can I talk to about helping with
> development and brainstorming ideas?
>
>
> -Robert
>
>
>
>
> On Tue, Mar 18, 2014 at 9:21 AM, Jacob <jacobusbogers@???
> <mailto:jacobusbogers@gmail.com>> wrote:
>
> Excellent, I think this idea was first proposed by Voltare
> (voluntarism). but less the leaches who predate on the labour and/
> or life of others.
>
>
> On Sat, Mar 15, 2014 at 3:40 PM, Adam Gmail
> <adamlevinemobile@??? <mailto:adamlevinemobile@gmail.com>> wrote:
>
> It's about the tribe, tools for location independent community
> and collaboration mean local is a philosophical decision, you
> have many locals to pick yours from and you can even pick many.
>
> Morality is rules based, rules are localized so participating In
> disparate communities just means voluntarily opting in to
> multiple rule sets and moralities.
>
> It is good to have options.
>
> Sent from my iPad
>
> On Mar 15, 2014, at 2:32 AM, "jamileh s.t."
> <xiaziyna@??? <mailto:xiaziyna@googlemail.com>> wrote:
>
> > as humans evolved from we have developed very efficient
> computational devices. the ability to think on a group level is
> not something that comes easy to us as traditionally we would be
> part of a small and local community. being accustomed to such an
> environment it became typical for us to evaluate right and wrong
> for a small community mostly composed of family. the definition
> of right and wrong being something biological, something like
> "how can i preserve as many humans who are most closely related
> for as long as possible". we developed secondary systems for the
> prime directive "how can i improve living quality", "i feel pain
> when i touch fire", "i feel sadness when i lose a loved one". we
> are now at a point in history where we have veered sufficiently
> away from such basic needs and the ruleset does not completely
> suffice, we must now think on a group level, we are not
> concerned with death, we place emphasis on other needs.
> >
> > it's difficult to define what this new ruleset should be,
> should we completely abandon our earlier genetic tools in favour
> of computational answers? i don't think so completely, i think
> inherently those earlier systems lead to good outcomes and fast
> decisions. for example, before we developed the current eye, we
> had a more primitive eye system which saw at a much faster rate,
> but with alot poorer vision, you can imagine how this is good in
> certain situations and in the same way how our very rough
> genetic tools allow us to get a "feel" of the situation. you can
> say why do we need to stick to this arbitrary ruleset whose sole
> purpose is to preserve humanity, when maybe we can have another
> ruleset that does the same thing, maybe we don't need to be kind
> to each other but we can still survive on medicine and live for
> a long time. our genetic programming does allow for this, our
> genetic programming allows us the intellectual capacity to
> overcome our genetic programming. i believe this i
> s where we should use computational tools, we are beginning to
> connect the points that form the logistic map, the consequences
> of waste, the consequence of slavery, the consequences of
> hoarding information, these are all consequences which take
> effect over time, and now due to the rapid rate the world moves
> at, are taking place within our lifetimes. a caveman without
> computer could not predict such outcomes, like when they hunted
> to extinction the megafauna or killed off the neanderthals.
> >
> > so maybe "right" and "wrong" are not the correct words, but
> it's kind of recursive, they have come to embody our instincts,
> and are thus defined by our instincts.
> > _______________________________________________
> > unSYSTEM mailing list: http://unsystem.net
> > https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/unsystem
> _______________________________________________
> unSYSTEM mailing list: http://unsystem.net
> https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/unsystem
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> unSYSTEM mailing list: http://unsystem.net
> https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/unsystem
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> unSYSTEM mailing list: http://unsystem.net
> https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/unsystem
>
::
Re: [unSYSTEM] Cody Wilson
