4 ms·

> No matter what the resources of the 1% are, if the 99% were actually to come after them there would be very little they could do about it. Have you seen the

by p-e-w 4y ago

> No matter what the resources of the 1% are, if the 99% were actually to come after them there would be very little they could do about it. Have you seen the advances in robotics during the past decade? Very soon the powerful will be able to use such robots to crush any revolt, even if it's 99% vs 1%. Not to mention that those same people control virtually all human communication, so organizing a revolt against their opposition would be nearly impossible anyway. The time when there was strength in numbers is swiftly coming to an end.

steve_adams_86 4y ago
Edit: I’m not sure why I inferred that you suggested that control would belong to a single group, but I wrote this response as though that’s what you said. In retrospect you don’t seem to be excluding the possibility of what I’m describing, so we might actually be on essentially the same page. Also edit: one major concern I have isn’t even traditional weapons or force, but bespoke bio weapons made possible by technologies we already have which are advancing rapidly. Using sickness against enemies was profoundly effective in the past, and could be even more so today. There doesn’t appear to be a way, or even an initiative to find a way, to prevent this technology from going rogue. ———— I worry less about unified entities using this kind of power and more about rogue entities essentially utilizing monopolies of force to terrorize each other and their dominated populations. I don’t think a single group would rule the world so to speak. Like organized crime, powerful groups would likely claim regions and countries and exist in an extremely precarious and perilous struggle for power. There would remain a seemingly endless arms race. If one group came out on top, I have no doubt that it too would fracture and initiate yet another arms race. I can’t be certain because the technologies we’re seeing developed, and what’s on the horizon, is absolutely game-changing in many ways. What if one country unlocks fusion and some other key technologies, but doesn’t share them? Say, China for example. If they could use that to efficiently build a staggeringly huge and powerful military with brand new technologies no one could practically contend with, we’d certainly see a new hegemony. But I’m very doubtful that it would last long due to internal fracturing. I’m open to being wrong of course.

by p-e-w 4y ago

steve_adams_86 4y ago

Edit: I’m not sure why I inferred that you suggested that control would belong to a single group, but I wrote this response as though that’s what you said. In retrospect you don’t seem to be excluding the possibility of what I’m describing, so we might actually be on essentially the same page. Also edit: one major concern I have isn’t even traditional weapons or force, but bespoke bio weapons made possible by technologies we already have which are advancing rapidly. Using sickness against enemies was profoundly effective in the past, and could be even more so today. There doesn’t appear to be a way, or even an initiative to find a way, to prevent this technology from going rogue. ———— I worry less about unified entities using this kind of power and more about rogue entities essentially utilizing monopolies of force to terrorize each other and their dominated populations. I don’t think a single group would rule the world so to speak. Like organized crime, powerful groups would likely claim regions and countries and exist in an extremely precarious and perilous struggle for power. There would remain a seemingly endless arms race. If one group came out on top, I have no doubt that it too would fracture and initiate yet another arms race. I can’t be certain because the technologies we’re seeing developed, and what’s on the horizon, is absolutely game-changing in many ways. What if one country unlocks fusion and some other key technologies, but doesn’t share them? Say, China for example. If they could use that to efficiently build a staggeringly huge and powerful military with brand new technologies no one could practically contend with, we’d certainly see a new hegemony. But I’m very doubtful that it would last long due to internal fracturing. I’m open to being wrong of course.