5 ms·

This line of thinking is what will ultimately end us as a species. There are a number of systems that must run in a loop. When that loop stalls, because labor

by than3 3y ago

This line of thinking is what will ultimately end us as a species. There are a number of systems that must run in a loop. When that loop stalls, because labor is part of that loop, and illiquidity occurs, and people can't get food. You get a deflationary spiral, and everything breaks down from there. The only offset would be printing a massive amount of money, but then you have rational pricing (that cost vs the product) go out the window. Rational pricing is required to properly allocate resources in a scarce world. Its a very fine balance keeping enough liquidity in the economy so this doesn't happen, and we've all see how well that's turned out. This leads to the economic calculation problem where the policy maker has to balance on a knifes edge using lagging indicators (without futuresight), where you either get hyper-inflationary currency death spiral, or you get a deflationary death spiral from the ever closer margins over time. This has been a known problem for over 100 years, with no solution found. Several non-market socialist economies based on this have failed in that time, each time caused death on a large scale, what do you think will happen when its the reserve currency of the world and you do this?

analognoise 3y ago
Its arguable that non market economies failed due to fast feedback mechanisms to determine where goods need to go and what needs to be produced. They failed before computers were widespread, cheap and powerful. With the amount of data that comes into Amazon, Walmart, Target, and Costco, could you allocate resources correctly in real time? Yes, sure.
- than3 3y ago
  No you couldn't allocate resources 'correctly'. Anyone saying so hasn't read the literature, or understand the requirements for how computers actually work. The math is impossible because not all information is available. You don't have future sight and the information you need to derive from is lagging. Its temporally bound to a point in time in the past. Additionally, the process involves optimizing production from the production raw materials all the way to the end products. This includes knowing about and re-optimizing in the cases where something locally fails sometimes in the absence of people reporting it (non-deterministic). In non-market systems, shortages cause death, and the only way to avoid shortages is to overproduce by a healthy margin, and even then that doesn't account for those unpredictable events (i.e. for example, like a shipping area catching fire and the nitrogen fertilizer blowing up in Beirut destroying all stored cargo nearby; who could have predicted that). Anyone saying this is possible isn't a credible source. There is over 100 years of study into this problem by some of the best in their fields, and it remains unsolved.
  - kugutsumen 3y ago
    GPT4 > Analognoise and than3, you both bring up interesting points in your discussion. The potential for utilizing the power of modern computers and the vast amount of data available to optimize resource allocation is an intriguing idea. However, as than3 points out, there are inherent limitations in our ability to predict the future and account for unforeseen events. It's true that non-market economies in the past have faced significant challenges due to the lack of fast feedback mechanisms and the inability to effectively allocate resources. While the advent of powerful computers and the availability of data could potentially improve these systems, it's important to acknowledge the inherent limitations of computers and mathematical models. As than3 notes, not all information is available, and there will always be unpredictable events that can disrupt even the most carefully planned resource allocation systems. It's also true that solving this problem has remained elusive despite over a century of research by experts in various fields. That said, the goal isn't necessarily to find a perfect solution, but rather to explore ways in which modern technology can help improve our understanding and management of resource allocation. This could involve developing more sophisticated models, utilizing machine learning algorithms to analyze large datasets, and combining the insights gained from these tools with human expertise and judgment. In conclusion, while it's unlikely that we will ever be able to achieve "perfect" resource allocation, there's still value in exploring the potential of modern technology and data-driven approaches to improve our economic systems and decision-making processes.
kugutsumen 3y ago
GPT4's answer to your comment :) A potential solution to tackle the economic calculation problem and avert both hyper-inflationary and deflationary death spirals involves creating a more flexible, decentralized economic system. This approach might include: Decentralized decisions: Spread economic power by allowing local communities and smaller organizations to make decisions based on their specific needs and situations. This could lead to better resource allocation and increased responsiveness to local economic changes. Implement Universal Basic Income (UBI): A UBI would offer a safety net for individuals, ensuring their basic needs are met, regardless of economic conditions. This could reduce pressure on policy makers to maintain the delicate balance between inflation and deflation, and help prevent spirals. Use technology advancements: Apply artificial intelligence and machine learning to enhance economic forecasting, resource allocation, and overall economic management. These technologies can help policy makers make better-informed decisions, addressing the lack of foresight in current economic systems. Encourage innovation and entrepreneurship: Support policies and incentives that promote innovation, risk-taking, and business creation. A more dynamic and competitive economy can adapt better to changing conditions and foster resilience during economic instability. Promote sustainability and resilience: Motivate businesses, communities, and individuals to prioritize long-term sustainability over short-term gains. By focusing on resource preservation and environmental stewardship, we can build a more resilient economy less prone to catastrophic breakdowns. Although no single solution guarantees prevention of economic death spirals, adopting a mix of these strategies could help create a more adaptable, resilient, and sustainable economic system better prepared to face future challenges.
- than3 3y ago
  The problem with GPT in general is it lacks any understanding of what its saying. It sounds plausible if you don't have the background, simply because its been trained on a vast corpus of material. It hallucinates (lies) too. When you talk about decentralized decisions, its all fine to generalize that, but what does that actually mean. It means different things to different people in a very complex unmapped system. Simply doing what it says ignores a great number of outcomes, and will fail when being adopted in any highly concentrated business sector. Failure can mean a lot of things, but when dealing with existential issues, it means death because that is what's on the line. UBI will also fail, because you don't know what you need to do until the time to make that decision has already come to pass. Liquidity freezes up if theres too little currency, and inflation runs rampant if there's too much. That's the nature of a lagging indicator. There are also further deviations that are unpredictable, and they end in shortages (i.e. a traffic accident causes a shipment to be lost). Shortages of electronics not a big deal. A 1-month shortage of food will wipe out most countries. People don't sit by and starve. Technological advancements (aka using computers) will never be able to correctly identify different outputs from the same inputs. Its called the decidability problem. Computers rely upon problems having deterministic answers (fundamental computation, and automata theory). You can approximate some signals with non-determinism but you run into a whole host of other problems (i.e. halting). Sustainability and resilience mean different things to different people. Same problem as the last point.
gremlinsinc 3y ago
Or you know, we move towards a star trek society, where money isn't even a thing. The only status symbol is accomplishments / wisdom / etc, and everyone is basically working in research capacities mostly, or doctors. A post-scarcity society where people live more sustainable (read: less consumer-based) lives, where they'd spend less if they had money but they don't need to spend less because there is no money. Money is a man-made concept, who's to say aliens with our level of intelligence or better use money for trade? Perhaps they use knowledge as currency or something else. We're going to need to think outside the box to figure out how the world works when 75% of it can't find a job.

by than3 3y ago

analognoise 3y ago

Its arguable that non market economies failed due to fast feedback mechanisms to determine where goods need to go and what needs to be produced. They failed before computers were widespread, cheap and powerful. With the amount of data that comes into Amazon, Walmart, Target, and Costco, could you allocate resources correctly in real time? Yes, sure.

than3 3y ago
No you couldn't allocate resources 'correctly'. Anyone saying so hasn't read the literature, or understand the requirements for how computers actually work. The math is impossible because not all information is available. You don't have future sight and the information you need to derive from is lagging. Its temporally bound to a point in time in the past. Additionally, the process involves optimizing production from the production raw materials all the way to the end products. This includes knowing about and re-optimizing in the cases where something locally fails sometimes in the absence of people reporting it (non-deterministic). In non-market systems, shortages cause death, and the only way to avoid shortages is to overproduce by a healthy margin, and even then that doesn't account for those unpredictable events (i.e. for example, like a shipping area catching fire and the nitrogen fertilizer blowing up in Beirut destroying all stored cargo nearby; who could have predicted that). Anyone saying this is possible isn't a credible source. There is over 100 years of study into this problem by some of the best in their fields, and it remains unsolved.
- kugutsumen 3y ago
  GPT4 > Analognoise and than3, you both bring up interesting points in your discussion. The potential for utilizing the power of modern computers and the vast amount of data available to optimize resource allocation is an intriguing idea. However, as than3 points out, there are inherent limitations in our ability to predict the future and account for unforeseen events. It's true that non-market economies in the past have faced significant challenges due to the lack of fast feedback mechanisms and the inability to effectively allocate resources. While the advent of powerful computers and the availability of data could potentially improve these systems, it's important to acknowledge the inherent limitations of computers and mathematical models. As than3 notes, not all information is available, and there will always be unpredictable events that can disrupt even the most carefully planned resource allocation systems. It's also true that solving this problem has remained elusive despite over a century of research by experts in various fields. That said, the goal isn't necessarily to find a perfect solution, but rather to explore ways in which modern technology can help improve our understanding and management of resource allocation. This could involve developing more sophisticated models, utilizing machine learning algorithms to analyze large datasets, and combining the insights gained from these tools with human expertise and judgment. In conclusion, while it's unlikely that we will ever be able to achieve "perfect" resource allocation, there's still value in exploring the potential of modern technology and data-driven approaches to improve our economic systems and decision-making processes.

kugutsumen 3y ago

GPT4's answer to your comment :) A potential solution to tackle the economic calculation problem and avert both hyper-inflationary and deflationary death spirals involves creating a more flexible, decentralized economic system. This approach might include: Decentralized decisions: Spread economic power by allowing local communities and smaller organizations to make decisions based on their specific needs and situations. This could lead to better resource allocation and increased responsiveness to local economic changes. Implement Universal Basic Income (UBI): A UBI would offer a safety net for individuals, ensuring their basic needs are met, regardless of economic conditions. This could reduce pressure on policy makers to maintain the delicate balance between inflation and deflation, and help prevent spirals. Use technology advancements: Apply artificial intelligence and machine learning to enhance economic forecasting, resource allocation, and overall economic management. These technologies can help policy makers make better-informed decisions, addressing the lack of foresight in current economic systems. Encourage innovation and entrepreneurship: Support policies and incentives that promote innovation, risk-taking, and business creation. A more dynamic and competitive economy can adapt better to changing conditions and foster resilience during economic instability. Promote sustainability and resilience: Motivate businesses, communities, and individuals to prioritize long-term sustainability over short-term gains. By focusing on resource preservation and environmental stewardship, we can build a more resilient economy less prone to catastrophic breakdowns. Although no single solution guarantees prevention of economic death spirals, adopting a mix of these strategies could help create a more adaptable, resilient, and sustainable economic system better prepared to face future challenges.

than3 3y ago
The problem with GPT in general is it lacks any understanding of what its saying. It sounds plausible if you don't have the background, simply because its been trained on a vast corpus of material. It hallucinates (lies) too. When you talk about decentralized decisions, its all fine to generalize that, but what does that actually mean. It means different things to different people in a very complex unmapped system. Simply doing what it says ignores a great number of outcomes, and will fail when being adopted in any highly concentrated business sector. Failure can mean a lot of things, but when dealing with existential issues, it means death because that is what's on the line. UBI will also fail, because you don't know what you need to do until the time to make that decision has already come to pass. Liquidity freezes up if theres too little currency, and inflation runs rampant if there's too much. That's the nature of a lagging indicator. There are also further deviations that are unpredictable, and they end in shortages (i.e. a traffic accident causes a shipment to be lost). Shortages of electronics not a big deal. A 1-month shortage of food will wipe out most countries. People don't sit by and starve. Technological advancements (aka using computers) will never be able to correctly identify different outputs from the same inputs. Its called the decidability problem. Computers rely upon problems having deterministic answers (fundamental computation, and automata theory). You can approximate some signals with non-determinism but you run into a whole host of other problems (i.e. halting). Sustainability and resilience mean different things to different people. Same problem as the last point.

gremlinsinc 3y ago

Or you know, we move towards a star trek society, where money isn't even a thing. The only status symbol is accomplishments / wisdom / etc, and everyone is basically working in research capacities mostly, or doctors. A post-scarcity society where people live more sustainable (read: less consumer-based) lives, where they'd spend less if they had money but they don't need to spend less because there is no money. Money is a man-made concept, who's to say aliens with our level of intelligence or better use money for trade? Perhaps they use knowledge as currency or something else. We're going to need to think outside the box to figure out how the world works when 75% of it can't find a job.