3 ms·

As this sort of thinking becomes more and more popular, I wonder how close to some kind of singularity we truly are. If the people of the world are really so ea

As this sort of thinking becomes more and more popular, I wonder how close to some kind of singularity we truly are. If the people of the world are really so eager to transform the planet into a single global monoculture, then some sort of technology-driven unification of all human consciousness can't be too far off. Me, I personally like a world of true diversity, where people of different physical regions are allowed to have unique local cultures. Complete and total globalization of everything on the planet (and perhaps beyond) might be inevitable, but I don't trust the people who are trying to make it happen right now to have any common peoples' best interests in mind, because I'm not naive to human nature (plus I've read up on them).

deleted 8y ago
[deleted]
hawkice 8y ago
> Me, I personally like a world of true diversity, where people of different physical regions are allowed to have unique local cultures. I think free movement is likely to amplify culture, not mute it. Right now I have to go through tons of hoops to live in Taiwan. The culture is precisely my aesthetic. I've spent untold hours studying the language. There are lots of Taiwanese-culturally-minded Americans and Dutch and South Africans who don't feel at home in their birth culture. Making it a big hassle for them to live in a culture that reflects their values just smears out culturally-Taiwanese across those countries.
- adamrezich 8y ago
  Surely the hoops you have to go through to live in Taiwan despite not being a native prevent the country from being overrun by people who are culturally incompatible with the local populace? It sucks you have to go through hoops and can't just fly there and move in tomorrow I guess, but in a world where you could do that, so could I, and I can't speak any Chinese or Taiwanese, I don't know anything about their culture, and my only connection to the country is an aunt who married into the family. What if a bunch of people like myself moved there suddenly for some random reason, and the local culture was essentially eradicated as we altered it to suit our desires? with global open borders, this sort of thing would happen constantly, all over the place, and with the advent of the Internet, most of culture would merge into even more of a ubiquitous monoculture than the world already is.
  - hawkice 8y ago
    I suspect you underestimate how massively disruptive it is to move to another country, particularly one that doesn't speak any language that you speak. Maybe America would pick up a lot of random people, being huge and wealthy, but everywhere else, I would seriously doubt it would get this kind of drive-by immigration you imagine.
    - adamrezich 8y ago
      Do you have any evidence to back any of that up? Personally I'm seeing a lot of mass migration across the world--not all of it wanted by the citizens of the countries being migrated to--right now, even without globally open borders. Why would having globally open borders do anything but increase this rate? It's also interesting that you think globally open borders would only affect the culture of America, but you're okay with that, presumably because whatever Americans consider to be their culture currently is meaningless in your eyes compared to the glorious no-nations-no-borders future world you envision, which conveniently has no negative consequences and is only a positive thing for everyone (except Americans who like their country and culture more or less the way it is now but eh tough luck for them I guess)
      - int_19h 8y ago
        There are some numbers right there in the article about that, including some examples with open borders (e.g. within EU).
- samatman 8y ago
  How would you enjoy Taipei with 25 million Filipinos in it? More, or less? If you wanted that, would you not live in Manila?
amelius 8y ago
> then some sort of technology-driven unification of all human consciousness can't be too far off If that happens, then the unified consciousness would be incredibly lonely. This in contrast to when cells assembled into humans, and at least the humans had other humans to talk to.
int_19h 8y ago
> people of different physical regions are allowed to have unique local cultures. Freedom of movement doesn't prevent anyone from choosing any culture that they see fit, though. No-one is "disallowing" anything. If cultures end up blending into one, it would be a natural, voluntary process. So why is it inherently bad? Because of the loss in diversity? But if we can't maintain diversity as a species without use of force (which is what restrictions on movement are - at some point you have to forcibly prevent people from moving to implement that), then it would seem that we don't consider it all that important.

deleted 8y ago

[deleted]

hawkice 8y ago

> Me, I personally like a world of true diversity, where people of different physical regions are allowed to have unique local cultures. I think free movement is likely to amplify culture, not mute it. Right now I have to go through tons of hoops to live in Taiwan. The culture is precisely my aesthetic. I've spent untold hours studying the language. There are lots of Taiwanese-culturally-minded Americans and Dutch and South Africans who don't feel at home in their birth culture. Making it a big hassle for them to live in a culture that reflects their values just smears out culturally-Taiwanese across those countries.

adamrezich 8y ago
Surely the hoops you have to go through to live in Taiwan despite not being a native prevent the country from being overrun by people who are culturally incompatible with the local populace? It sucks you have to go through hoops and can't just fly there and move in tomorrow I guess, but in a world where you could do that, so could I, and I can't speak any Chinese or Taiwanese, I don't know anything about their culture, and my only connection to the country is an aunt who married into the family. What if a bunch of people like myself moved there suddenly for some random reason, and the local culture was essentially eradicated as we altered it to suit our desires? with global open borders, this sort of thing would happen constantly, all over the place, and with the advent of the Internet, most of culture would merge into even more of a ubiquitous monoculture than the world already is.
- hawkice 8y ago
  I suspect you underestimate how massively disruptive it is to move to another country, particularly one that doesn't speak any language that you speak. Maybe America would pick up a lot of random people, being huge and wealthy, but everywhere else, I would seriously doubt it would get this kind of drive-by immigration you imagine.
  - adamrezich 8y ago
    Do you have any evidence to back any of that up? Personally I'm seeing a lot of mass migration across the world--not all of it wanted by the citizens of the countries being migrated to--right now, even without globally open borders. Why would having globally open borders do anything but increase this rate? It's also interesting that you think globally open borders would only affect the culture of America, but you're okay with that, presumably because whatever Americans consider to be their culture currently is meaningless in your eyes compared to the glorious no-nations-no-borders future world you envision, which conveniently has no negative consequences and is only a positive thing for everyone (except Americans who like their country and culture more or less the way it is now but eh tough luck for them I guess)
    - int_19h 8y ago
      There are some numbers right there in the article about that, including some examples with open borders (e.g. within EU).
samatman 8y ago
How would you enjoy Taipei with 25 million Filipinos in it? More, or less? If you wanted that, would you not live in Manila?

amelius 8y ago

> then some sort of technology-driven unification of all human consciousness can't be too far off If that happens, then the unified consciousness would be incredibly lonely. This in contrast to when cells assembled into humans, and at least the humans had other humans to talk to.

int_19h 8y ago

> people of different physical regions are allowed to have unique local cultures. Freedom of movement doesn't prevent anyone from choosing any culture that they see fit, though. No-one is "disallowing" anything. If cultures end up blending into one, it would be a natural, voluntary process. So why is it inherently bad? Because of the loss in diversity? But if we can't maintain diversity as a species without use of force (which is what restrictions on movement are - at some point you have to forcibly prevent people from moving to implement that), then it would seem that we don't consider it all that important.