5 ms·

So...just looking really far down the road here, but it seems that a common theme among lots of films set in the future is that currency is a thing of the past.

So...just looking really far down the road here, but it seems that a common theme among lots of films set in the future is that currency is a thing of the past. If you could print any physical item, especially if you could pirate the plans, then there would hardly be a need for a currency because everything would almost be free. The only way to make money would be to either produce the printers or create new products and sell the plans.

madamepsychosis 15y ago
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Post_scarcity http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Post_scarcity
- firefoxman1 15y ago
  Ooh, thanks for that. Edit: That wasn't sarcasm. I appreciated the link. No need for downvoting.
  - ljf 15y ago
    hi (didn't downvote you but just fyi) its likely you were downvoted for a ccomment which didn't add anything.
    - firefoxman1 15y ago
      Well, actually that comment has since been upvoted back to neutral lol.
  - ljf 15y ago
    hi (didn't downvote you but just fyi) its likely you were downvoted for a ccomment which didn't add anything.
backprojection 15y ago
Well, presumably you could print the next generation of printers using the previous generation. You'd still need to pay for the energy/raw materials to run them though. Maybe if LFTR works out, energy will be next-to-free also.
- firefoxman1 15y ago
  Both very good points. Printing a printer is quite a thought.
  - icebraining 15y ago
    Printing a printer is quite a thought. Check out the RepRap project. They're trying to design a cheap, open source 3D printer that can print itself: http://reprap.org/wiki/RepRap http://reprap.org/wiki/RepRap
    - firefoxman1 15y ago
      Oh that's insane. It says it's self-replicating, but can it assemble the parts it creates or is a human needed? And what about the microchips? Those still take expensive machinery to produce, right?
      - icebraining 15y ago
        Well, their goal is to make it self-replicating, but it's far from it for now. I think it can essentially make the specialized parts, but you still need to buy various common parts and assemble it yourself. See the BOM of non-printed parts: http://reprap.org/wiki/Prusa_Mendel#Non-Printed_Parts_.28.22vitamins.22.29 http://reprap.org/wiki/Prusa_Mendel#Non-Printed_Parts_.28.22...
        cabalamat 15y ago
        > Well, their goal is to make it self-replicating, but it's far from it for now. Indeed. Replicators are at roughly the same point today that personal computers were in 1975. So expect that in a few decades everyone will have one in their house, able to make a very wide range of objects.
- kaybe 15y ago
  For all it's worth, here's a simple printer that runs on sand and sunshine: Video: http://www.markuskayser.com/ http://www.markuskayser.com/ Text with photos: http://www.thisiscolossal.com/2011/06/markus-kayser-builds-a-solar-powered-3d-printer-that-prints-glass-from-sand-and-a-sun-powered-laser-cutter/ http://www.thisiscolossal.com/2011/06/markus-kayser-builds-a...
swalsh 15y ago
Are the materials free? I think water is a really good analogy of how people treat resources when there is no economic nominal value attached.
- firefoxman1 15y ago
  I wonder if someday you could take a material like a rock (or something with the proper atoms) and convert that into something like a shirt. I mean, look how far technology went from 1900 to 2000. Imagine 200 more years.
  - deleted 15y ago
    [deleted]
bmelton 15y ago
I presume you'd still need to pay for the cost of materials. Even if you had a printer that could machine whatever you wanted, and the plans were available for free (and not licensed to the printer as software,) then you'd still need to pay for a rather large amount of steel, plastic, rubber, copper and all the other materials that go into the manufacture of a car.
- firefoxman1 15y ago
  That's assuming that money is still an adequate motivator in a (word I just learned) post-scarcity world. Governments might be responsible for providing the raw materials?
  - bmelton 15y ago
    Automatic printing of items doesn't create a post-scarcity world. The printing machines can only print from plans. People who create those plans may sell them, and those plans may be pirated, but there's still industry. There's still supply and demand. If nobody is compensated for the manufacture of the plans, you're either on your own to create them or perhaps they'll be donated. Given the state of charity in the world, one can assume that they won't be donated, but given the state of open source, one might assume that they will. Regardless, the plans aren't self-creating and/or limitless. Why would the governments supply the raw materials for you to purchase a car? If they aren't currently motivated to just buy you a car, why would they be suddenly motivated to pay for all the materials that go into a car's manufacture, even if the labor cost is reduced? If the materials were free, what's to stop everyone from printing out 20 different types of cars and luxury mansions?
  - jonhohle 15y ago
    And who would mine, gather, process, prospect, and distribute the materials? What motivation would those individuals have? (Actually, I would love to see a candidate who was actively sinking a shovel every day to produce or driving a tractor trailer to deliver raw materials for her/his constituents.) Based on the current trend, however, I doubt we'd ever see a post scarcity world: oil, rare-earth metals, gold, silver, and even wood and stone are all scarce at scale. Sunlight may be one of the only things available on earth that humans can't destructively consume.
jerf 15y ago
I want to build my own Matrioshka Brain out of Jupiter. Post-scarcity is interesting from the point of view of the necessities of life being so close to free as to make no difference. But it's a long way to go before we truly will have more resources than we know what to do with. Our desires show a clear trend of scaling with our resources; we already have more wealth than any Mesopotamian farm peasant could ever dream of, and most of us could probably easily figure out what to do with another $100,000.
- davedx 15y ago
  It's not really a long way to go before we have more resources than we know what to do with. We could be there right now, but (here it comes) 1% of people have the majority of the resources.
  - jerf 15y ago
    And if they evenly distributed them to everybody in some borderline mythical manner (because wealth isn't actually that portable), it would still roughly double or triple your personal wealth, tops. Again, I think most people could figure out what to do with that and would still after a year or two resume wanting something or other they can't afford.
Dove 15y ago
Even if replicators could completely replace manufacturing and agriculture (and that would be looking pretty far down the road), the change in society wouldn't be as big as you'd think. The service sector already constitutes about 75% of GDP in just about any mature economy, and we all still use money. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_GDP_sector_composition http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_GDP_sector...
- toomuchtodo 15y ago
  If you can replicate material at will, you can spend all your time perfecting robotics to perform service work. Said robotics can than be replicated en masse across the world with previous "replicators".
  - dkokelley 15y ago
    I don't think you grasp the entirety of the service sector. Creative services (programming, consulting, design, etc.) can't yet be readily replaced be robotics or machines. Creating beings that can themselves create is a significant undertaking.
    - _Y_ 15y ago
      Well they are replacing scientist(or lab assistants) and doctors, who is to say any human endeavor can't be automated?
    - itmag 15y ago
      Exactly. http://blog.opportunitycloud.com/2009/09/10/the-golden-scarcities/ http://blog.opportunitycloud.com/2009/09/10/the-golden-scarc...
iwwr 15y ago
Energy wouldn't be free, it may be vastly more abundant and for practical purposes free for "consumer uses", but not exactly free in the general sense. To print you also need raw materials, some of which may be more rare but in high demand (and therefore more expensive). Lastly, there would presumably be high technological processes (like chip manufacturing) or simply huge industrial ventures ({space} ship manufacturing) which can't be readily replicated with semiportable 3d printers.

madamepsychosis 15y ago

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Post_scarcity http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Post_scarcity

firefoxman1 15y ago
Ooh, thanks for that. Edit: That wasn't sarcasm. I appreciated the link. No need for downvoting.
- ljf 15y ago
  hi (didn't downvote you but just fyi) its likely you were downvoted for a ccomment which didn't add anything.
  - firefoxman1 15y ago
    Well, actually that comment has since been upvoted back to neutral lol.
- ljf 15y ago
  hi (didn't downvote you but just fyi) its likely you were downvoted for a ccomment which didn't add anything.

backprojection 15y ago

Well, presumably you could print the next generation of printers using the previous generation. You'd still need to pay for the energy/raw materials to run them though. Maybe if LFTR works out, energy will be next-to-free also.

firefoxman1 15y ago
Both very good points. Printing a printer is quite a thought.
- icebraining 15y ago
  Printing a printer is quite a thought. Check out the RepRap project. They're trying to design a cheap, open source 3D printer that can print itself: http://reprap.org/wiki/RepRap http://reprap.org/wiki/RepRap
  - firefoxman1 15y ago
    Oh that's insane. It says it's self-replicating, but can it assemble the parts it creates or is a human needed? And what about the microchips? Those still take expensive machinery to produce, right?
    - icebraining 15y ago
      Well, their goal is to make it self-replicating, but it's far from it for now. I think it can essentially make the specialized parts, but you still need to buy various common parts and assemble it yourself. See the BOM of non-printed parts: http://reprap.org/wiki/Prusa_Mendel#Non-Printed_Parts_.28.22vitamins.22.29 http://reprap.org/wiki/Prusa_Mendel#Non-Printed_Parts_.28.22...
      - cabalamat 15y ago
        > Well, their goal is to make it self-replicating, but it's far from it for now. Indeed. Replicators are at roughly the same point today that personal computers were in 1975. So expect that in a few decades everyone will have one in their house, able to make a very wide range of objects.
kaybe 15y ago
For all it's worth, here's a simple printer that runs on sand and sunshine: Video: http://www.markuskayser.com/ http://www.markuskayser.com/ Text with photos: http://www.thisiscolossal.com/2011/06/markus-kayser-builds-a-solar-powered-3d-printer-that-prints-glass-from-sand-and-a-sun-powered-laser-cutter/ http://www.thisiscolossal.com/2011/06/markus-kayser-builds-a...

swalsh 15y ago

Are the materials free? I think water is a really good analogy of how people treat resources when there is no economic nominal value attached.

firefoxman1 15y ago
I wonder if someday you could take a material like a rock (or something with the proper atoms) and convert that into something like a shirt. I mean, look how far technology went from 1900 to 2000. Imagine 200 more years.
- deleted 15y ago
  [deleted]

bmelton 15y ago

I presume you'd still need to pay for the cost of materials. Even if you had a printer that could machine whatever you wanted, and the plans were available for free (and not licensed to the printer as software,) then you'd still need to pay for a rather large amount of steel, plastic, rubber, copper and all the other materials that go into the manufacture of a car.

firefoxman1 15y ago
That's assuming that money is still an adequate motivator in a (word I just learned) post-scarcity world. Governments might be responsible for providing the raw materials?
- bmelton 15y ago
  Automatic printing of items doesn't create a post-scarcity world. The printing machines can only print from plans. People who create those plans may sell them, and those plans may be pirated, but there's still industry. There's still supply and demand. If nobody is compensated for the manufacture of the plans, you're either on your own to create them or perhaps they'll be donated. Given the state of charity in the world, one can assume that they won't be donated, but given the state of open source, one might assume that they will. Regardless, the plans aren't self-creating and/or limitless. Why would the governments supply the raw materials for you to purchase a car? If they aren't currently motivated to just buy you a car, why would they be suddenly motivated to pay for all the materials that go into a car's manufacture, even if the labor cost is reduced? If the materials were free, what's to stop everyone from printing out 20 different types of cars and luxury mansions?
- jonhohle 15y ago
  And who would mine, gather, process, prospect, and distribute the materials? What motivation would those individuals have? (Actually, I would love to see a candidate who was actively sinking a shovel every day to produce or driving a tractor trailer to deliver raw materials for her/his constituents.) Based on the current trend, however, I doubt we'd ever see a post scarcity world: oil, rare-earth metals, gold, silver, and even wood and stone are all scarce at scale. Sunlight may be one of the only things available on earth that humans can't destructively consume.

jerf 15y ago

I want to build my own Matrioshka Brain out of Jupiter. Post-scarcity is interesting from the point of view of the necessities of life being so close to free as to make no difference. But it's a long way to go before we truly will have more resources than we know what to do with. Our desires show a clear trend of scaling with our resources; we already have more wealth than any Mesopotamian farm peasant could ever dream of, and most of us could probably easily figure out what to do with another $100,000.

davedx 15y ago
It's not really a long way to go before we have more resources than we know what to do with. We could be there right now, but (here it comes) 1% of people have the majority of the resources.
- jerf 15y ago
  And if they evenly distributed them to everybody in some borderline mythical manner (because wealth isn't actually that portable), it would still roughly double or triple your personal wealth, tops. Again, I think most people could figure out what to do with that and would still after a year or two resume wanting something or other they can't afford.

Dove 15y ago

Even if replicators could completely replace manufacturing and agriculture (and that would be looking pretty far down the road), the change in society wouldn't be as big as you'd think. The service sector already constitutes about 75% of GDP in just about any mature economy, and we all still use money. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_GDP_sector_composition http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_GDP_sector...

toomuchtodo 15y ago
If you can replicate material at will, you can spend all your time perfecting robotics to perform service work. Said robotics can than be replicated en masse across the world with previous "replicators".
- dkokelley 15y ago
  I don't think you grasp the entirety of the service sector. Creative services (programming, consulting, design, etc.) can't yet be readily replaced be robotics or machines. Creating beings that can themselves create is a significant undertaking.
  - _Y_ 15y ago
    Well they are replacing scientist(or lab assistants) and doctors, who is to say any human endeavor can't be automated?
  - itmag 15y ago
    Exactly. http://blog.opportunitycloud.com/2009/09/10/the-golden-scarcities/ http://blog.opportunitycloud.com/2009/09/10/the-golden-scarc...

iwwr 15y ago

Energy wouldn't be free, it may be vastly more abundant and for practical purposes free for "consumer uses", but not exactly free in the general sense. To print you also need raw materials, some of which may be more rare but in high demand (and therefore more expensive). Lastly, there would presumably be high technological processes (like chip manufacturing) or simply huge industrial ventures ({space} ship manufacturing) which can't be readily replicated with semiportable 3d printers.