Jonathan Valiente:
> I would make the argument that technology is amoral. We choose how to apply
> technology, for great good or great evil. Therefore, the efforts of
> humanity should be directed towards the moral behavior of people in systems
> of interaction.

Biiig mistake. You would deny cause and effect.

Software is a very personal and creative endeavour. From the encryption
button, how I handle users data, shape their behaviour or what colours I
use are shaping the way users interact and perceive my software. And
also helps shape their values by shaping their behaviour.

> Such a direction yields less utopian outcomes. For each actor is free to
> choose in what manner they use their time on this earth. And inasmuch as
> limited-humans can define an optimal morality in which we should all
> subscribe, it is still up to individuals to accept or reject.
>
> I sympathize with the champions of technological leverage. Perhaps the
> train of thought goes, if only we create systems that subvert the status
> quo, we no longer need to participate in the corrupt systems we’ve
> inherited. While I very much desire such a thing/place, I still find
> reservations in that it doesn’t address the moral issue at hand. So long as
> morality is not adequately addressed, any revolution of any kind will be
> subject to the incessant decay of human nature. You could suggest
> theoretical proofs of safeguards and divisions of power, but given time,
> corruption seems to be an innate historical fact. Maybe with more intellect
> we will solve such issues?...I am doubtful because I don’t think intellect
> is the ‘thing’ that will solve our issues -- even a supremely ignorant
> person can share his/her resources while a sophisticated expert may be less
> inclined.

This is not the totality of my thread of thought.

For instance: I support cooperatives. I can build a tool to enable
people to better manage and create cooperatives.

We can drive towards our goal with a powerful tool. But without
knowledge of philosophy and ethics, you end up with chumps making toys
for iphones.

> Are humans self-aware to see outside the inherited culture and scientific
> understanding of the time to properly define what a corrupt individual is?
> I think not. Attempts at incorruptible systems are admirable, but I
> consider the human condition to be far too limiting.

Corruption is the most interesting topic.
So far I haven't had much success, and it seems a multi-party democracy
and single-party state is rather superfluous in difference when looking
at actual studies.
The one thing they trump though is transparency, and also if we can
devolve power maybe people will have more say to effect and solve these
problems.
Unfortunately people don't want to be free nor responsible to run their
lives, and that is a cultural thing that requires education to bring
people up towards that goal.

About the next part, I'm looking for a political system that can solve
our problems before we hit the catastrophe rather than resigning myself
that some great power I've never seen will come rescue us. Maybe he
won't. I'd rather be prepared.

> So by what basis or perspective do I claim all (myself included) humans to
> be ignorant, uneducated, and supremely limited? I suppose my belief in
> higher levels of organization unknown to the world at large i.e. God the
> Creator. You could attach the entirety of presumptions when it comes to
> such a volatile statement, but I would hope the rigorous intellectual could
> entertain the thought without subjecting me to the same ideological box of
> others who claim to speak with the authority of God.
>
> I believe the optimal morality has been defined by Jesus Christ. I believe
> that what we see is *not* what we get as history so clearly displays -- and
> while some may consider our little speck of dust floating in the cosmos to
> be the entirety of human experience, I consider it to be the training
> ground for guiding corrupt beings towards incorruption. I believe
> knowledge of such things comes from the spiritual dimension, to any
> individual humble and willing to submit to the will of God.
>
> I am here to tell you that the *only true authority of God* has been
> restored to this earth in this critical time to prepare for the Second
> Coming of Jesus Christ and that God does indeed commune with mankind via
> the mechanism of sincere prayer. I believe these things to be a reality.
>
> Let us not use the logic of men to understand such grand concepts, for we
> know from Kurt Gödel the limitations of logical systems. We also know If we
> were born in ancient Greece we would reason with the framework of
> understanding of the time e.g. the earth is composed of 4 elements: earth,
> fire, wind, water. In current times we will reason according to the modern
> framework of understanding, still limited nonetheless. Unfortunately it is
> an impossibility for you to checksum the integrity of this message. All I
> can do is encourage you to ask the appropriate questions and to *seek
> knowledge from the spiritual dimension* with the aid of the current prophet
> of God (Thomas Monson) and the Book Of Mormon which is a second witness of
> Jesus Christ and supports the Bible -- It clarifies many of the
> adulterations found therein. Knock and it shall be opened, seek and ye
> shall find. Best wishes.
>
> I apologize if my line of reasoning appears simplistic. I chose to be
> concise over verbose.
> https://www.lds.org/scriptures/bofm?lang=eng
>
> On Sun, Sep 6, 2015 at 1:21 PM, Arturo Filastò <arturo@???> wrote:
>
>> I apologise in advance if what I talk about may appear to be a little be
>> off topic, but by reading this thread and in particular the words of
>> Jaromil and Amir I believe this is fertile ground in which to express some
>> of my ideas.
>>
>> The more time goes by the more disillusioned I become about some aspects
>> of these so called “movements” close to the
>> anarcho-libertarian-crypto-paranoia sub-system.
>> What actually worries me much more than all of our communications being
>> intercepted and who we speak to known to people we would like to conceal
>> this from is that once we have The Perfect end-to-end encrypted,
>> decentralised, distributed, privacy preserving communication tool that
>> everybody in the world uses, we actually don’t have anything meaningful to
>> say over it.
>> What use is crypto and these tools to us if we don’t have an idea or a
>> plan as to what we should do with it?
>>
>> I see this brainwashing being particularly prevalent in the Berlin scene
>> and it makes me sick and that is one of the reasons why some years ago I
>> fled the city promising to never live here again.
>>
>> The other aspect is that I sometimes have some serious problems
>> understanding what are the motivations and the ideals underpinning the
>> behaviours of certain people in this realm and have been stung by this in
>> the past. Said differently it doesn’t mean that if two people are
>> interested in doing the same thing, they are both doing it for the same
>> reason. The reason, in my opinion, is actually the most important thing and
>> agree on what to do is just not enough, we should also agree on WHY we do
>> it.
>>
>> This lack of vision and common shared objective makes me often doubt if I
>> should continue focussing on what it is I am focussing on and if I should
>> instead move to tackle other more important and relevant problems.
>> The times I have stopped a moment to look around and listen to what the
>> earth is telling us I realise that surveillance and technological control
>> is only just a small piece of this puzzle. If we continue in what we are
>> doing, in not too long we will completely fuck ourselves. We have actually
>> already fucked ourselves, the club of Rome warned us of this already in
>> 1972, but nobody listened to their warning that if nothing were to be done
>> there would not be any turning back. We are now too late. We are fucked.
>> All we can do is extend our the lifetime of humanity, but what has been
>> done is the last century is now IRREVERSIBLE.
>>
>> Going back to the main topic in question I have a hard time understanding
>> why certain people are doing what they do. To make an example I don’t
>> understand why Cody Wilson is so much into this idea of making guns. What
>> is the vision there? What is the end goal?
>> Is it really necessary to fuck up a beautiful technology such as 3d
>> printing to make a political statement? In a way it’s as if somebody were
>> to publish schemes on how to use enzymes to build a bioweapon, hence
>> realising the threat that people proposing more regulation on biohacking
>> are using to justify it.
>> Groups in the past have overthrown their own government without the need
>> of 3d printed guns and let’s be frank you are not going to supply an army
>> with plastic guns and expect them to have a chance against the US
>> government. I’m sorry, but I just don’t buy it.
>>
>> Again I am sorry if this is a long off-topic rant, but I wanted to get
>> these things off my chest and I hope that somebody here can in some way
>> relate to it. Some of the people I have spoken to about ideas have not
>> given the importance I believe this problem deserves and I believe this is
>> caused by the anarcho-libertarian-crypto-paranoia sect brainwashing that I
>> see going on all around me.
>>
>> ~ Arturo
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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
>