:: Re: [unSYSTEM] collective vs privat…
Góra strony
Delete this message
Reply to this message
Autor: Anthony D'Onofrio
Data:  
Dla: System undo crew
Temat: Re: [unSYSTEM] collective vs private
Fair analysis, not a bad model.

"I don't know what technological and market solutions will appear to better
protect individuals, so much so that centralized protection services like
the police and military become unnecessary, but I remain optimistic about
the future. I have no desire to use these tools help maintain antiquated
centralized systems."

If we look at the reasons for police and military I think there are some
solutions. Police and prisons are a response to criminal activity. But
lower-class criminal activity. Do away with poverty and in a couple
generations this will be largely gone.

The second is that militaries are the result of a few phenomenon I can
think of, the first being scarcity. If all resources were infinite it would
not be worth the cost to fight over them. Except - in the case of
sociopaths whose currency is power. They will play games with groups just
for the sheer joy of manipulation. This is not a minor problem, they are
estimated to be 1-3% of the population. 3 out of every 100 people is enough
to do a lot of damage. To solve this problem we can either attempt to
program out all the sociopaths somehow, or model societies so that the
dominant market strategies are pro-social instead of anti-social. This is
where reputation systems become important.

So, my current thesis is that - the less scarce we can make resources
through systems and technology, the higher incentives we can create to
reward pro-social action, and the more front-end social investing we do,
the better.















On Tue, Apr 15, 2014 at 8:53 PM, Washington Sanchez <
washington.sanchez@???> wrote:

> My thoughts:
>
>    - High transaction costs for various goods and services typically lead
>    to centralization temporal market monopolies (not even talking about the
>    government-sponsored ones)
>    - High transaction costs can be afforded by individuals or groups of
>    individuals who possess capital and accept risk. These players become the
>    gatekeepers and *the* *exclusive *third parties.
>    - As a result, many individuals have little or no mobility within the
>    market as only a few players are capable of handling these high transaction
>    costs. Well known duopolies come to mind: McDonald's vs Burger King, Coke
>    versus Pepsi, Republican vs Democrat, Labor vs Liberal
>    - Revolutionary technologies that folks like us get excited about
>    (e.g. 3D printing, Bitcoin, mesh networks, DIY drones), directly challenge
>    these players and the centralized model they operate under. Fundamentally,
>    these technologies significantly reduce these high transaction costs so
>    that the *common man* can start to provide these services for
>    themselves or for a small group of others. Market mobility is now possible
>    for everyone, rigid centralized models are disrupted.
>    - If we were to take a glancing look at the trends, the explosion of
>    information and communication has catalyzed the development of technology
>    to break-down high transaction costs. Heavily centralized services and *exclusive
>    *third parties have their days numbered. Once the network effect of
>    these decentralizing technologies outpace the existing centralized order, a
>    real, peaceful, and perhaps subtle revolution occurs.
>    - Bitcoin threatens the centralization of the economy by the
>    government and banks, who have long abused their privileged position to
>    oppress everyone else. The underlying high transaction costs of enforcing
>    monetary contracts, protecting vast sums of wealth, loans and high level
>    market operations, are fast becoming within the reach of every human being.
>    If trends continue, I foresee the government being permanently banned from
>    the economic and market order.
>    - Physical security is one of the ultimate high transaction costs,
>    just above money itself. This is, in effect, the high transaction cost
>    service to overcome. For this reason, individuals perpetuate the network
>    effect that is called 'government', in well-reasoned fear of the
>    alternative (chaos, criminal gangs).
>    - I don't know what technological and market solutions will appear to
>    better protect individuals, so much so that centralized protection services
>    like the police and military become unnecessary, but I remain optimistic
>    about the future. I have no desire to use these tools help maintain
>    antiquated centralized systems.

>
> Regards,
>
> drwasho
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> unSYSTEM mailing list: http://unsystem.net
> https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/unsystem
>
>



--
--
Anthony D'Onofrio
iamtexture@???
501.681.3225
-
Chaos Collider - Dream. Design. Develop. Deploy.
http://www.chaoscollider.com
-
Peace.Love.Human.
http://www.peacelovehuman.org

"Don't ask yourself what the world needs. Ask yourself what makes you come
alive and then go do that. Because what the world needs is people who have
come alive." - Howard Thurman