3 ms·

If ~all the goods are produced automatically we are all parasites living off of the labor of the machines, if you really want to use that word. The way I think

by phryk 13y ago

If ~all the goods are produced automatically we are all parasites living off of the labor of the machines, if you really want to use that word. The way I think about it it's simply taking away the necessity to labor for your survival. I guess most people will spend a very large chunk of their newly won time socializing and I don't see anything wrong with that. If everyone can celebrate each and every day of their lives, I'm strongly in favor of it. :)

chii 13y ago
> we are all parasites living off of the labor of the machines but some parasites are more equal than others - namely, those who owns the machines. You might ask, why do some own the machines (or means of production), while others dont? Its not a question i m in authority or knowledgable enough to answer, but my take on it is that its a snowball effect - once you gain enough capital (or, as i called it above - means of production), you can effectively get other people's productivity as a lever to increase your own. Note, only those who already have capital can do this - people who cannot accrue capital either take big gambles (like borrowing lots of money without being able to pay it back, if they can borrow it at all). Or they just don't do it, and remain status quo. Either way, the only option left for them is to live or work. Thus the cycle perpetuates, and this is the "cause" of the wealth divide - not because some people worked harder, but because opportunities don't come knocking equally. In aa he world where automation is completely replaced all labour, either everyone is capable of being an owner, and thus, all profit to be made using automation is so thin you don't get much of an advantage doing it compared to someone else. Or, some small group basically owns all means of production, and essentially owns the world and everyone in it (either via their power to control resource supply, since they own it!), or indirectly via lobby/"taxes" they pay that the rest of the meeples gets to live off. I m hoping the first scenario comes to pass, but i highly doubt it. Looking at the world now, its much more likely that the 2nd scenario comes to pass.
- phryk 13y ago
  Well, we already see a democratization of the means of production. Look at open source 3D printers. Did you know there is an open library for smart materials? For genetic information? Open Hardware projects are multiplying, think arduino, raspberry pi, beagleboard… I mean shit - even the last CCCamp had it's own piece of open hardware. I myself am thinking about developing a little robot that can tend plants, basically an open source toolchain for vertical farming… There is more and more stuff like this coming up all the time. And of course there's even an open source civilization starter kit you can inform yourself about at http://opensourceecology.org http://opensourceecology.org IMHO the risk of one faction being all-powerful is nearly zero. We have good times ahead. Even though the road may have a few bumps.

by phryk 13y ago

chii 13y ago

> we are all parasites living off of the labor of the machines but some parasites are more equal than others - namely, those who owns the machines. You might ask, why do some own the machines (or means of production), while others dont? Its not a question i m in authority or knowledgable enough to answer, but my take on it is that its a snowball effect - once you gain enough capital (or, as i called it above - means of production), you can effectively get other people's productivity as a lever to increase your own. Note, only those who already have capital can do this - people who cannot accrue capital either take big gambles (like borrowing lots of money without being able to pay it back, if they can borrow it at all). Or they just don't do it, and remain status quo. Either way, the only option left for them is to live or work. Thus the cycle perpetuates, and this is the "cause" of the wealth divide - not because some people worked harder, but because opportunities don't come knocking equally. In aa he world where automation is completely replaced all labour, either everyone is capable of being an owner, and thus, all profit to be made using automation is so thin you don't get much of an advantage doing it compared to someone else. Or, some small group basically owns all means of production, and essentially owns the world and everyone in it (either via their power to control resource supply, since they own it!), or indirectly via lobby/"taxes" they pay that the rest of the meeples gets to live off. I m hoping the first scenario comes to pass, but i highly doubt it. Looking at the world now, its much more likely that the 2nd scenario comes to pass.

phryk 13y ago
Well, we already see a democratization of the means of production. Look at open source 3D printers. Did you know there is an open library for smart materials? For genetic information? Open Hardware projects are multiplying, think arduino, raspberry pi, beagleboard… I mean shit - even the last CCCamp had it's own piece of open hardware. I myself am thinking about developing a little robot that can tend plants, basically an open source toolchain for vertical farming… There is more and more stuff like this coming up all the time. And of course there's even an open source civilization starter kit you can inform yourself about at http://opensourceecology.org http://opensourceecology.org IMHO the risk of one faction being all-powerful is nearly zero. We have good times ahead. Even though the road may have a few bumps.