[ a / b / art / cy / lain / alt / o ] [ wired / meta ] [ home / information / affiliates / updates ] [ mebious ]

/b/ - Random

Changes over time.
Password (For file deletion.)

File: 1671224331695.jpg (Spoiler Image, 22.04 KB, 600x360, Capitalism-vs.-Socialism.jpg)


People argue about what system benefits the people more, but they all fail in practice because some powerful entity subverts said system.
Capitalism? Monopolies and eventual bloating of government in favor of the elite.
Socialism? Manipulation and corrupt government. Anarchy? The masses are easily manipulatef tribalistic nutcases, and the smart ones aren't immune either.
Monarchy? A shit king is an inevitability.
Democracy? Irrational mob rule and manipulation by the elite.
Theocracy? Who do you trust to dictate what the holy book means in good faith?
Every system is worthless if the people cannot enforce it. How do you account for that?


Making the image a spoiler was an accident. Whoops.


Before you had communities that were more isolated and tied to each other through their basic knowledge and same taught beliefs. Now that the world has expanded thanks to technology and every idea now at everyone's fingertips to learn or absorb things can never be stable ever again.


This. Tribalculture was the only consistend system. The next possible consistend system will be the cyberpunk future, but not the cool one. Genemanipulation will delete unwanted parts on humanity and people will have less emotions in general. Males will maybe have higher testosterone again to reproduce, but less testosterone receptors in the brain, so they will be chads with soyboy brains. Food will be replaced by large-scale solutions that go on par with not destroying our planet and feeding 20 billion people. So basically powder drinks and bugs. (obviously this doesnt count for the elite). Whoever doesnt fit in will be put on medication as long as we dont have the possibility to genetically make everyone fitting. This will be the only possible solutions.
I've had this idea once (obviously just as a LARPing thought, not serious). What if the grey man - meaning aliens - actually exist and are on earth, but they are not aliens, but timetravelling humans so genetically engineered that they have lost their animalistic parts completely.


We live in a high mass low trust society, most of these are doable if you know every single person who is a part of it. however different cultures will eventually have different problems with accepting each other if they live under one banner.

California and texas are part of the usa, and they will never agree on guns. Globohomo makes that everybody has the same culture, therefore minimizing friction between people, isolate them into their own wired bubbles, and there is no wars, no problems, just individual happiness, the catch is, if a person knows that their hapiness is fake, the brain activates the self destruction module.


well regarding the criticism of capitalism, true monopolies can only be granted by the government so that is an issue with authoritarianism and not the economic system.


>What if the grey man - meaning aliens - actually exist and are on earth, but they are not aliens, but timetravelling humans so genetically engineered that they have lost their animalistic parts completely

I've actually heard this theory a lot over the years and it's honestly gaining more attention to be taken seriously as a highly likely possibility. I even personally consider it a small chance to be true.


Why do you imbeciles insist on defending capitalism by making up dumb conspiracies about a secret cabal of "globohomo" operating from the shadows? The unification of culture was an aspect of capitalism that has been out in the open at least since it became the dominant mode of production. People actually used to be able to understand it as a necessary part of how capitalism operates. Marx wrote this almost two centuries ago, in 1847:
> The bourgeoisie, by the rapid improvement of all instruments of production, by the immensely facilitated means of communication, draws all, even the most barbarian, nations into civilisation. The cheap prices of commodities are the heavy artillery with which it batters down all Chinese walls, with which it forces the barbarians’ intensely obstinate hatred of foreigners to capitulate. It compels all nations, on pain of extinction, to adopt the bourgeois mode of production; it compels them to introduce what it calls civilisation into their midst, i.e., to become bourgeois themselves. In one word, it creates a world after its own image.
But you retards still refuse to open your eyes and accept reality and instead invent all kinds of fairy tales to excuse your own enemies and put some scarecrows in their place. Just how stupid can you get?


Can you quote for me where i defended capitalism in my post? Or did you just made and entire paragraph based on a made up assumption inside your head, tranny style?

Please do not turn this into lainchan


You do that, whether you are aware of it or not, by attributing the effects of its normal functioning to the machinations of a cabal of "globohomo" boogeymen.
> tranny style
I'm not the one ruining this site. If you can't post without parroting these thought-terminating cliché from 4chan, you should just leave this site.


If that's the case, then capitalism is too easily undermined by authoritarianism, which goes back to my original point: the system doesn't matter if the people do not enforce and protect it.


How would one avoid a high mass low trust society Without going full ted?

There is gated communities but even those still depend on the current system or are actively on top of it, there are isolated places like malta or the virgin islands but people try to keep those places to themselves(rightfully so), and even then you will probably live a simple life comparing to the average low class person in la or new york.

The balance between living a normal life and not being part of whatever system you oppose is only doable by doing [fedpost] with other people, but in a low trust society how can one trust random people that allegedly share your point of view.

This is the greatest achievement the fed pulled, even if its not real anybody could be double teaming you or the whole thing might be a psyop, making people paranoid and making so that the only things that happens is the ones that are allowed by tptb.

How does one cope?

This post is all theoretical for a Gmod rp server not real life mr agent.

Schizo Tranny post, ignore all tranny posts.


But is that desirable? to relinquish your humanity? To be something you're not? We all wish to be superhuman cyborgs, but we also wish to keep our humanity with it. I am sure that for some people that are severely depressed anything would do, but what about those that enjoy the life that they live? An a.i has no distinction between ethical matters or "gut feelings", once one reaches that state what makes him not enforce his will upon others? We have psychopaths in the normal world, wouldn't they be the same just with extra steps?
No system works if there is 20%+ of people discontent with it.
And people seem to like extreme opposites nowadays.
The only thing trying to terminate thoughts here is your suicide attempts tranny boy.


>You do that
>No i dont
>you do that whether you're aware or not
>No i dont

So you just assumed inside your head and went on a diatribe because of it, got it.

These are BPD symptoms, notify your school and potential friends immediately.


File: 1671508682129.jpeg (140.63 KB, 1200x924, net.jpeg)

I think most people would easily accept it, given the instant reward factor


All of these problems you mentioned are solvable by holding the elite accountable, and rotaring them every once in a while


But that's my point. It's so hard to get people to quit fighting each other long enough to do that.


Besides stopping the fights between "the masses" I think there may have to be a stopping of the fight within ourselves. This may be me projecting onto the general populace, but I'm not convinced about the legitimacy of any particular system anymore. I think that might be seen in other parts of society as well (though the counterargument would be the vocal minority which has very clear and well-defined views). The lack of confidence and faith inevitably results in lack of will to fight. Whatever that may be for.


Historically you only need 20% of a discontent population to flip things on its top, and of these 20% maybe 100 people(read schizos) that actually do things and a good money source can change things for the better or the worse.

How many people supported the IRA vs how many people were actually on the IRA?
How many people support ukraine vs how many people are actually fighting for it?
How many people use drugs vs how many people are selling it?
All you need its a spark and things will spiral outta control real fast In gmod.
The hard part is to tard wrangle said people after, look at blm, they did all of that but in the end all they got was their own neighborhood burned down and nothing really changed in regard.


It would taked the combined effort of the entire right wing intellegentsia to come up with something coherent and sound and it would be something marx predicted centuries ago



Its the same question, po' but free or comfortable but compliant


This is just a fallacy of perfection. The problem mainly comes down to centralizing of power over wide areas. When you have more decentralized systems the near by rregions act as backups for points of failure creating a robust socialist framework. The added aid of AI technology in some areas of governance helps eliminate human error and the additional running of the tech in various regions helps to act as a check on it.


Truly the darkest timeline, where every one is the same, when a person can fix their shortcomings with technology without the insight that comes with it.


Is this post informed by any particular reading of political philosophy or is this just your own opinion? You'll have quite a more nuanced question if you brought this to bear against Plato- which is where you should begin reading. I'd reccomend the Theatetus, Sophist, Statesman, series of dialogues.
Only cogent thought in this thread.


All of these posts were made by the same person.

Yea, but is it better to be poor in a rich society or to be well off in a controlling society?


The thing is whenever a city gets too big to form it sown culture it should be independent.
Small towns across a country have more in common than the big cities have with the rest of the country and each other.


File: 1671735848812.jpg (67.23 KB, 720x453, Derp.jpg)

No they weren't


I'm not asking for perfection and I'm strongly in favor of decentralizing power for the same reasons you pointed out. It just seems like every system we attempt inevitably fails catastrophically.


maybe we aren't meant to have a system?


We aren't really "meant" for anything but making babies, but the population is only getting bigger and people more connected and aware of one another. Anarchy and small tribal culture doesn't scale well. If one country does decide to take that route and somehow pull it off, they'll just get conquered due to a lack of organization.


Thats the op post, That one was supposed to be on the 2 point
True anarchy means living like animals we have places like somalia or detroit, which are technically lawless but are actually ruled by a couple of druglords, The thing is these places are supported by a bigger entity protecting them, Small tribal organizations tend to work if they are in extreme isolation or are mobile enough to disperse and relocate, but its that a life the average person wish to live? There is cartels and people living on the run from the law, is that desirable? What about the billionaires that also technically live outside the law?


What about an a.i controlled society? Theoretically the ai could see many steps ahead and provide mathematically the moat amount of hapness possible. Something about the human nature does not like it though, it just doesnt feel right. Matrix effect.


I've been consuming too many AI safety videos but theoretically the problem with this would be that it's hard to properly operationalize something like happiness. What parameters do you want to maximize within the model? Should everyone get the maximum amount of economic wealth? Should everyone have the optimal amount of happy signal neurotransmitter floating between their synapses? What genuine quantitative measure do you link to something as abstract as happiness?
If no countries enforced their borders I assume something like this would happen. I would guess it would happen based on culture though, and if you assimilated to the culture you could travel to any location you'd want to. Of course, this wouldn't hold in the long term because some power-hungry wealth-accumulator would venture to seize increasing resources.


what if you are mentally ill and your happiness is cutting yourself?
There is so many intricacies to the human psyche and different ways of achieving said happiness, some contradictory to each other, someone born in a farm has a different view of happiness someone born in wealth or someone born as a child soldier, that is not counting people that feel happy making others feel sad, i feel that an a.i would just reach the logical conclusion that nobody can be happy and make life middling for everybody.

Every single one of these believe that yes their way of living is better than the system(except for the billionaires because they are the system), the thing is how many people keep getting pushed to it directly coorelaates to tehir standards of living, that is the same reason people look back on 50s america with rose tinted glasses, you could own a house have a family be part of a community and have your hobbies without financial insecurity, compared to 2022 (un)instability no wonder there is no more people willing to be part of the system, once the system reaches the individual threshold that the person has living outside of it turns desirable.


Is a high mass high trust society even doable? We all know "Hello neighbor" towns exist but where is the cap? And even on these towns people have their own groups.




How many sci fi novels about an ai society are good vs which ones are hell?


My town was like that until most of the people who held the town together either died or moved away. Most of the people I went to school with also moved away that held values here. Now it's just a bunch of junkies, outsiders, and the worst greedy people at city hall that stayed behind with only gaining more power. A lot of people who tried to prop up small businesses also were run out of town by extremely high taxes or being bullied into the "cult system" we have here. On top of nostalgia this is quite another reason why I desperately miss the 90s wanting to return to how it used to be.


Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?




Ideally, but the populus is easily manipulated by the watchers they're supposed to be watching.


Thats why you unironically needs schizo patriotic militias to keep the watchers in check


Is it possible for an a.i to have "gut feelings"?

[Return][Go to top] [Catalog] [Post a Reply]
Delete Post [ ]
[ a / b / art / cy / lain / alt / o ] [ wired / meta ] [ home / information / affiliates / updates ] [ mebious ]