collapse

Author Topic: The Ethical Planetarian Platform; Revision 002  (Read 40404 times)

sky otter

  • Guest
Re: The Ethical Planetarian Platform; Revision 002
« Reply #45 on: November 11, 2012, 07:32:05 am »

ah Petrus
i do have a computer..and guess what i turn it off at night ..just in case of ???????? lol
who knows what..and it faces my book shelves

the onstar in my car has been disabled..but don't squeal on me, please  ;)

i do not own a cell phone..if i'm not here ..you'll hafta call back
what an inconvience for you
but freedom for me
or come on over and sit on the porch..i'm ususally here
i just haven't been trained to run to answer a divice every time it rings..lol

i do luv my wahser and dryer but don't consider them as robots
they don't think and i still work controls to make them go
..well me and the electric company

i am on here but not 24/7
i got a bargin book catalog the other day and ordered a 927 pg book
Native American Ethnobotany along with a few others on plants
and i can't wait to get it
i will sit in front of my fire with a glass of something and the critters
..the four legged ones not Z's..
well maybe z's critters too..lol

while i don't enjoy large crowds i do participate in many things
involving real live humans still

and best of all i work everyday to heal the mother earth
and find joy in this meat suit exsistence

and while i will not curb your doing whatever it is
that tickles your pickle
don't count on my joining you any time soon

the sun is shining and i am going for a walk in the woods
have a wonderous afternoon

 8)


opps i meant to add that i am free from the ideas of robot revolt ..
i have seen the commercials for movies when i turn on the tube for
weather news..so i am aware of that
but i don't like movies ..sorry
..or video games..sorry or
someone else doing my thinking for me or forming an opinion for me
or telling me what's here and out there
doesn't mean i'm stupid or unaware..just that i have CHOOSEN
not to play in that bunch
wow..imagine..making my own choices..how absolutely novel

bwhahahahahahahah
« Last Edit: November 11, 2012, 07:44:05 am by sky otter »

Offline Amaterasu

  • The Roundtable
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6713
  • Gold 276
  • Information Will Free Us
    • T.A.P. - You're It
Re: The Ethical Planetarian Platform; Revision 002
« Reply #46 on: November 11, 2012, 09:03:31 am »
Gee. Could We all live like that?

i don't want to live like that
and i don't want any robots messin in my home or life

In TAP, You don't HAVE to live in any fashion You don't want.  Don't HAVE to have robots.  but...  You do have the CHOICE to if You want.


Quote
i get it but don't like or agree with it ..
 so i won't be keeping it  alive
perhaps there are more like me who have their own ideas

it's nice to have your own idea...isn't it

respectfully not participating in your dream

[sigh] You clearly don't understand it.  Given that it solves starvation, poverty, oppression, wage/debt slavery, having to pump Human energy into a system instead of what You want to pump energy into...  I'd say it's surely a LOT better than what the world has now.  It wouldn't make YOU change a thing, but it WOULD free the poor and the starving from Their fate.

I guess that is not worth the effort, though.  Good on You that You have enough to eat, and screw everyOne else.
"If the universe is made of mostly Dark Energy...can We use it to run Our cars?"

"If You want peace, take the profit out of war."

Offline Amaterasu

  • The Roundtable
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6713
  • Gold 276
  • Information Will Free Us
    • T.A.P. - You're It
Re: The Ethical Planetarian Platform; Revision 002
« Reply #47 on: November 11, 2012, 09:26:31 am »
I think that robots could have a place in our lives.  I'm quite happy to have a washing machine rather than a washboard, I like having a diswasher, but to replace people in service positions with robots?  No thank you.

[shrug] If there are People who love doing the service You want, You will have no problems avoiding robots.  Are You saying it's better to force People to do things They don't WANT to do so that You can deal with a Human and not a robot?

Quote
I have no desire to live like the people in the Hamptons.  I would be bored out of what's left of my mind.

And in TAP, You don't HAVE to.  Again, if You want to go live in a yert on the Mongolian steppes, You can.  If You want to live in a small cabin in the woods, You can.  If You want a house that flies, You can have it.  If You want to have a ranch in Argentina, You can.  If You want to stay put and change nothing, You don't have to.  BUT...  People who presently are living in poverty, starving, working a jobs They hate because that's all They can get, can CHOOSE to live like They do in rich neighborhoods - if They want to - without HAVING to go to a job They hate, without pumping Their energy into the system which allows only SOME of Us to live richly.

Quote
I do admit that I'm basing my opinion of life in the Hamptons on the television series Revenge, but I've met people who have had everything pretty much given to them.  They don't seem all that happy and fulfilled.

Maybe because They have to deal with the issues of the imposed scarcity paradigm...

Quote
If I'm misinterpreting TAP, I apologize.  I understand that you see it as a wonderful and lofty goal Amy, but a lot of people need to be needed.

And They have the option of offering Their services.  In TAP, We can choose where We spend Our energy; not forced to pump it into where We couldn't care less but for a paycheck.

Quote
If you haven't read The Machine Stops, by E. M. Forster, I think you should.  It provides a good look at a world where every need is met by machines, until the machine stops.

And does there exist machine-repairing robots?  Does it include all the Humans whose bliss it is to tinker with and fix machines?  Just because We add machines to do the things We don't WANT to do, does not mean either that We can't do the things if We WANT to, nor that We will all forget how the machines are created.  That is absurd.

Quote
I agree that taking the profit out of war is a good idea.  I don't happen to have a good idea how to make that happen though.  Western civilization is built on war.  The economy is bad and the menfolk are driving the womenfolk buggy?  Have a war!  Get the menfolk out from underfoot for a while.  Personally, I think that's a lousy solution, but historically, that's how it's done.

And historically We have never had free energy or robots as options, either.  Historically, We have had to pump Human energy into the system to keep it operational.  Civilization has had wars because war profiteers have incited them so as to make a profit.  Now They are making it perpetual war, with "terrorists" (however They choose to define "terrorists" moment to moment) as the "enemy."

Fascism is creeping in.  Executive orders strip the US constitution of all power.  NDAA's gut the Bill of Rights.  And soon, the powers given to the POTUS, making Hume dictator, WILL be used against Us.

So...  If We add free energy and robots for things NO ONE WANTS to do, We free every Human on this planet to CHOOSE the standard of living They wish.  Which is better?  FEMA Camps...or freedom?
"If the universe is made of mostly Dark Energy...can We use it to run Our cars?"

"If You want peace, take the profit out of war."

Offline Amaterasu

  • The Roundtable
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6713
  • Gold 276
  • Information Will Free Us
    • T.A.P. - You're It
Re: The Ethical Planetarian Platform; Revision 002
« Reply #48 on: November 11, 2012, 09:33:27 am »
It is important to understand that when most people think of robots, they think of one of two things:-

a}  Cybernetic Revolt, a la the Terminator and the majority of depictions of robots in popular culture.  The word "robot," as originally coined, referred to a humanoid machine, as documented here.

b}  Humanoid/cyborg perversions which are the domain of transhumanists, and which I do not condone.

Why do You not condone this?

Quote
I advocate the use of robotics, (or perhaps more desirably in order to get away from humanoid connotations) machine automation with the following three restrictions, which I would like to see passed into law as capital crimes, as a means of preventing repeat offense in the only manner which is 100% certain.

a}  The development or construction of humanoid robots is recognised as an unethical, pathological obscenity, which potentially poses severe risks to long term human survival.  I believe that the construction or design of humanoid robots should be an extremely serious crime, and that individuals who attempt to do such research, should be eligible for capital punishment.

Why?

Quote
b}  The development of devices which involve invasive and/or irremovable cybernetic (machine/human interface) technology should be permanently and universally banned, and any individual found to engage in such research should again be eligible for capital punishment, due to posing an unacceptable degree of risk to the rest of humanity as a species.  In my opinion, rather than being a philosophy, transhumanism is a mental illness, (deriving from an almost completely deluded view of reality; namely, pre-quantum Cartesian materialism) and a potentially lethal one.

What "risks?"  Why is this a problem?

Quote
c}  Any attempt to develop generalised machine intelligence, whether acorporeal, mechanical, or biological, with the capacity to surpass human intelligence, should, as with the other two, be viewed as a potentially lethal threat to long term human survival, and be dealt with accordingly.

Why?  BTW, should any of Our creations express Individuality and sentience, We will recognize Them as Beings and afford Them the same rights as any other Beings.

Quote
I consider acceptable forms of robots, to be strictly and exclusively non-humanoid machines, which are built for the automation of specific tasks, and do not have the required intelligence to be capable of anything other than said tasks.  I fuily recognise the potential danger of robotics as a branch of science; and while I advocate it within the stated criteria here, I do not advocate it under any other than extremely controlled circumstances.

Explain these dangers associated with Human-shaped machines...
"If the universe is made of mostly Dark Energy...can We use it to run Our cars?"

"If You want peace, take the profit out of war."

Offline Amaterasu

  • The Roundtable
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6713
  • Gold 276
  • Information Will Free Us
    • T.A.P. - You're It
Re: The Ethical Planetarian Platform; Revision 002
« Reply #49 on: November 11, 2012, 09:39:57 am »
Hell NO!!! I have been with people like that boring and phony as hell. I couldn't live like that and I think that anyone who thinks they can has RPE (Rich Person Envy} :P

I guess that would be Me, then.  I came from an upper middle class family, and lived richly.  But...  My point is not to make everyOne live in any way THEY DON'T WANT TO.  As long as the three Laws are kept.

Quote
Its not that hard to earn it :D  I simply put on a Crown and took a few loyal vassals and we stepped into their world :D  The best thing was, that after hob knobbing with those I got to go home :D

And that is what You could continue doing - without having to worry about how You're going to pay for things - like AC.  (And given My 7 year efforts to fin a job, I can assure You - for most in the poverty boat, it is VERY difficult to earn money - else there would be no poverty.)

Quote
I put a security system into a four story house owned by a Toronto mobster and his wife...  It was like working in a mausoleum. Four stories of museum quality furniture and decoration... but he was out with the boys all day till late at night and she ran her little shop... It was dead I tell ya... got an eerie feeling just being in there. You may think those living in the Hampton's have it good... trust me its not real :D

Again, the point is to follow Your bliss, not live in any given way.  If You are poor and starving - and LIKE that - You can continue living like that.
"If the universe is made of mostly Dark Energy...can We use it to run Our cars?"

"If You want peace, take the profit out of war."

Offline Amaterasu

  • The Roundtable
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6713
  • Gold 276
  • Information Will Free Us
    • T.A.P. - You're It
Re: The Ethical Planetarian Platform; Revision 002
« Reply #50 on: November 11, 2012, 09:43:38 am »

Ah yes the computer...

You know... BEFORE that evil invention took over our lives people used to actually go OUT and meet each other at a coffee shop, or go to events, or parties...  Now today they are all locked in their caves playing video games, dating via yahoo and wasting their life in endless hours in silly forums

And who are You to decide Others are "wasting Their time...?"  It's not YOUR place; it is Theirs.

Quote
Now I suppose it could be argued that 'free energy' might change that... because if I had free gas I would be out at some Medieval War instead of hanging out here :P

Nothing like sitting in my throne in front of a camp fire and watching the slave girls dancing all night  :D

You guys should have all voted for me as King  errmm President :P  I would have fixed things :D

Yes, free energy would give You the option of spending as much time in mock Medieval War as You want - AND come home if You WANT to - not because You HAVE to.
"If the universe is made of mostly Dark Energy...can We use it to run Our cars?"

"If You want peace, take the profit out of war."

Offline Amaterasu

  • The Roundtable
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6713
  • Gold 276
  • Information Will Free Us
    • T.A.P. - You're It
Re: The Ethical Planetarian Platform; Revision 002
« Reply #51 on: November 11, 2012, 09:47:20 am »
As to deep trenches, why would a robot be allowed to take that Bliss away from someone? Today only the very rich can afford to try that...  So under your system of no money, everyone could do that :D

'To hell and back': James Cameron is first solo diver to reach deepest point on Earth - but has to race back to surface after hydraulic failure seven miles down

what a RUSH :D  There is NO WAY a robot could experience that for us ;)

Of course We can take all the personal risks We want - as long as Others are not endangered.  You all seem to think TAP precludes such adventure.  Au contraire, it FREES Us to do these things.
"If the universe is made of mostly Dark Energy...can We use it to run Our cars?"

"If You want peace, take the profit out of war."

Offline Amaterasu

  • The Roundtable
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6713
  • Gold 276
  • Information Will Free Us
    • T.A.P. - You're It
Re: The Ethical Planetarian Platform; Revision 002
« Reply #52 on: November 11, 2012, 09:54:41 am »
ah Petrus
i do luv my wahser and dryer but don't consider them as robots
they don't think and i still work controls to make them go
..well me and the electric company

Robots don't "think."  If They think, They are not robots, but Beings.  Your appliances are robots.

Quote
and while i will not curb your doing whatever it is
that tickles your pickle
don't count on my joining you any time soon

The only thing that joining the efforts to spread TAP will do is take a wee bit of Your time, but beyond that, You would NEVER HAVE to change a thing.  Carry on as you are now.  Meanwhile, in getting it going, You SAVE LIVES in many ways; eliminating starvation, removing the power over Others the "elite" presently hold and are using to sicken Us and kill Us - like through war.

Quote
the sun is shining and i am going for a walk in the woods
have a wonderous afternoon

 8)


opps i meant to add that i am free from the ideas of robot revolt ..
i have seen the commercials for movies when i turn on the tube for
weather news..so i am aware of that
but i don't like movies ..sorry
..or video games..sorry or
someone else doing my thinking for me or forming an opinion for me
or telling me what's here and out there
doesn't mean i'm stupid or unaware..just that i have CHOOSEN
not to play in that bunch
wow..imagine..making my own choices..how absolutely novel

bwhahahahahahahah

And in TAP - making Your own CHOICES is what it's all about.
"If the universe is made of mostly Dark Energy...can We use it to run Our cars?"

"If You want peace, take the profit out of war."

PLAYSWITHMACHINES

  • Guest
Re: The Ethical Planetarian Platform; Revision 002
« Reply #53 on: November 11, 2012, 03:00:59 pm »
As L.E. stated, the 100 mile food economy would be the first step. Not just food, but most things could be made locally, until the transport & robot system is in place. Then you could just build one giant factory near the mine & export the products all over the world. Likewise, materials from the world can be sent to the factory (this way you avoid having robots running around empty handed).
But that's for the future, we need first to bridge the transition by reverting to a simple, local economy.

Robo;
Quote
to be forced to choose is no choice.
There is always a choice, even if you choose 'none of the above' it's a choice one can make.
It would maybe not be as good a choice as 'going with the flow' but one is still free to make it.

Quote
most people are idiots,i dont have much faith in democracy being a good avenue for the future.anarchy is more my liking.not chaos though.
Most people are unaware, this does not make them stupid per se, most are simply unaware because they are not noticing their surroundings. Others are being intentionally 'unaware' because they are afraid to step out of their comfort zone & seek the truth. The awareness is spreading, albeit slowly.
A democracy based on the above laws would have the best chance of surviving, especially if there's no possibility for personal gain at the cost of others.
Anarchy is different from chaos, we could have a loose, chaotic, ad-hoc world government running from the social networks.
These countries would be pretty much free to do as they please, so long as they stay within the 3 laws, share resources & info etc.
Since they themselves will also receive free resources info etc, they will greatly benefit from being part of it......

LOL Fruitbat, i loved that post ;)

As for 'rewards' & accolades for doing good work, why not? But a  true inventor is humble & would therefore not seek profit in any way. However, if one of us invents something, it is free for all to share, as long as they acknoweledge the inventor.
Myself, i would simply ask for (in leu of payment) a ton of transistors & copper wire for my next project from the 'resource pool', thanks :)

Quote
I'd imagine once the word got out my youtube channel would be pretty busy and my initial ebay sales would be quite strong until someone mass produces copies and undercuts me...

That is THE problem.
Anything that they can get 'intellectual rights' on will merely create a new power struggle, since they will be quick to get it licensed, taxed, copyrighted, you name it, until it's just as expensive as oil.
They would get even richer while we will basically still be in the same brown stuff......

The ONLY way to avoid this is to open source EVERYTHING. Like FB said, you would be free to sell your machines (and the idea here is that you sell the machine for a SMALL profit, enough to buy the components for 2 more machines for example) but you will be required by law to include the full (open sourced) plans with the machine.

Also, being 'open source' means that people will be free to change the design, experimant with it etc, just like Android & other software. This means there will be continuous improvements made, free of charge :P

Yes, Pimander;

Quote
To implement the changes or change THE LAW requires having the power to do so.  That makes it political in a very real sense.  Do you think those in power will stop engaging in politics because you ask them nicely to step aside?

Change will come by forcing the people in power to change because it will not be politically expedient to do anything else.  That involves being the opposite of politically naive.

Yes, it will not involve behaving in the obscenely distasteful ways the majority of successful politicians do.  However, even removing the current banking system is a highly political act and will only be done with a new type of politics. 

There is a reason that the 60s never gave us the world it hoped to.  That was due to not engaging in a politically effective way and never having any real power.

We can ask the politicians to step aside in many different ways, Pim ;)
I think the most effective one would be for thousands of us to stand around their homes shouting "We don't need you anymore".
As for removing the current banking system, it is going to remove itself, we will have to resort to a precious metal & simple trade system until the new system kicks in. This involves not only the spreading of 'the word' but also the free energy machines, the whole shebang presented as a complete package, with a complete thread on every issue.

Kind of what we're thrashing out here today ::)
That's the point, if someone comes onto this forum, they will have many questions & arguments, and we can say 'yes, we've covered that here would you like to join the discussion group?

Quote
"There is a reason that the 60s never gave us the world it hoped to.  That was due to not engaging in a politically effective way and never having any real power."

"And also not having a clearly defined path to progress on.  My work has been to provide precisely that."

Touche' Amy :)
That's the point i am trying to make. We do have a clearly defined path, based on logic, mutual trust, respect etc etc.
Yes, there are problems, mostly to do with human nature. That has to change as well. It IS changing.
Only most people are still in the dark as to what to do next, even being 'aware' is not enough, you have to know what to do next.

Well, we are covering that in great detail, are we not?

Quote
Quote from: Amaterasu on 19-10-2012, 14:56:35
Like spreading awareness to the tipping point such that We just do it.

Yes, that is why I am helping to run a site like this.  It is to TRY to spread awareness.  But there is a need for more than awareness even though awareness is an important step in the right direction.

See above ::)

Quote
Part of that path has to be the ability to make laws in line with our aims.  It is politicians that make the laws.
True, but you also have unwritten natural laws, that people tend to adopt.
Why do we wave at people, even strangers on a passing ship?

We wave to show them that we have no weapons in our hands, that we come in peace.

It's an ancient human reaction to another human, just like dogs wag their tails at other dogs.

OK so now we have developed speech, writing, moving pictures & the 'net. But the communication is still the same.

I can chat with someone far away, living in a totally different culture, & say 'look, i wish you no harm, i would like to talk'
And in talking to them, one finds that they generally have the same values as you.
Don't kill, don't waste, be good to people etc.

In other words, people when left to themselves, will generally evolve these basic laws, very much like the 3 'Amy' ones ;)
It's just common sense.
Why kill you neighbour in the summer, & find out you needed his help for the harvest?
Result: you starve, so you are both dead....

If we hadn't found these natural laws, we would not be here today, i'm sure of it :)

My dear Pim :)
Quote
Governance via the web is a pipe dream for a long time.  Large proportions of the worlds population do not even have running water let alone internet access.
True enough, but the general consent for it is there already. IF we could communicate freely without gubmint interference, it would be a great step in the right direction. True, we need to literally get more people with running water before we can hope to give them anything else.

Quote
First you need awareness and THE MEANS to be energy independent.  But in the transition, to anything resembling an era of abundance for most, you have to be able to engage politically to run things and make the technology and knowledge available to the millions of people currently out of reach.  Awareness is beyond most of the millions of people in Europe, Japan and North America yet.

Oh yes, they go hand in hand. You must approach those that DO have internet access, show them the problem, the answer, the choices they have, & the knoweledge to make a free energy machine, if not an actual machine, as a free gift ;)

I can see the page now;
Sign up with the world awareness party & receive a free 100 watt energy box today!
Hows that for political clout?

Quote
I think your aims are commendable.  Your methods of achieving it are destined to fail.  Humanity will wipe itself out long before it happens unless we start to change laws in a democratic and progressive way.  A cabal in control..... will not let go of power because some of the population ignore them.  To avoid an apocalyptic scenario you have to have a political arm.

Hmm, it's change fast, or die. I think that should be on the front page of the Abundance Paradigm book, don't you?

Yes, we do need to get politically involved.
That will involve a quagmire of arguments, beliefs etc which have nothing to do with the outcome, and may in fact hinder it, but it needs to be done.
Pim is right in that we do have a very real political aim with this, don't we?

Are we 'libertarians'?
It is something we will have to get involved in at some stage, since it will be easier to reach people if you at least start with a firm political standpoint.
(of course, any talk of a real local economy system will get you labelled as a 'commie' on sites like ATS within seconds ;) )
"Yessir, we's all gawd-fearin, hard workin' bible thumpin' redneck pa-tree-arts, we don' need youse dirty commie hippies roun' here"

To which, my usual reply is "We don't use 'ism's' of any kind roun' here"
(which is a bit of a lie, i like buddhism :)

Quote
I'm with you all the way on making people aware.  However, I am completely against your notion that it would be a bad thing to have political clout.  It is a naive and dangerous position.
I think you have a good point, Pim. You should head up the political arm of TAP, Amy the 'awareness team' & the inventors busy on the machines!
All working together, publishers, historians, reporters, tinkerers, and yes maybe even lawyers (OMG) we can all do something towards it...

I also agree with Petrus, A cage of our own making, running in we are, hmmm? {waggles pointy ears}

Quote
It's exactly like Occupy now; who are basically useless, because while they scream loudly at the corporate world about what victims they view themselves as being, any remote suggestion that they give up their mobile phones and try and develop a non-corporate form of telecommunications, will simply get you laughed at.
Just wait until the bankers themselves are living in tents, they will soon come around... ;)

Let's face it, when TSHTF they will be the ones hardest hit, they will have absolutely no income, no means of generating anything, & no knoweledge of what to do next. If they are smart they will quit & buy a farm somewhere. 300 of them have done just that :P

Quote
They do not want a genuinely new scenario, because they still do not believe, fundamentally, that they have the ability to make beneficial decisions for themselves.  They simply want a scenario where they can trust government and corporations to truly protect their interests, so they can go back to sleep.  What they don't understand is that that will never happen, because the interests of government and corporations have very little in common with those of the general population.

Nail, head.So what do we do about that?

Quote
Quote from: petrus4 on 20-10-2012, 12:49:18
I am no longer really emotionally invested in this outcome, but I will say that if there are any people out there who want a more positive scenario than what the cabal will give them, then the most important thing to do to start, is realise that the only reason why the cabal are in power at all, is because that's what the majority WANT.

And when the majority do not you are in a position to change things democratically.  To politically disengage is foolish and delays the transition.
Indeed.
It would take relatively few of us to tip things in the right direction, provided we have a fully worked out agenda that is transparent & free for all to read.
Quote
And "laws" are keeping Them at bay?  No, "laws" are not the answer.  THEY will ignore US.  You think movements are powerless, then?
No, I think that in the transition period apolitical movements are not powerful enough to usher in an era of abundance.  That is the lesson I have learned for Amnesty, Greenpeace, CND and the sixties flower power movement generally.  Noble aims but politically naive.  I think that I have already made myself clear.
Yes, those organisations tended to ignore the political side.
They mainly concentrated making people aware of the problem, rather than with the solution (and by this i mean taking politics into account).
But they are still useful.
It's vitally important at this stage to present people with a solution. One that has been very carefully thought out.
I think we are capable of this, as are many similar sites working along the same lines.
Of course, any cohesive effort to push for TAP as a political goal will make us instant enemies overnight so,
softly softly, catchee monkey ;)
Let's go full steam ahead on the awareness campaign, that still has to happen.

Keep people informed, show them results, show them alternatives, ask them what they think....

Openly discuss the politics of it, i tried once in the 'implications of free energy' thread, which has still been largely ignored.
That thread does what it says in the title, it discusses the implications of it all. Political, social, economic.

Yes, Pim, we should learn from history and become the 100th monkey
If the actions of a single human can change the world (Hitler, Napoleon, Newton, Tesla) then what can a dedicated group of humans NOT do?

Quote
On the other hand, the right kind of political movement is the only one that will stop either a disaster or the cabal clinging to power for a lot longer.  Unfortunately,you will be long dead before things move far unless a movement with the political nous and right principles to implement some of your ideas comes along.

Well, that's a bit dramatic, i think things will happen a lot sooner.
Greenpeace would join us, we could join Zeitgeist & so on, to become The Abundance Party :)
There are enough people with similar thoughts, they just need to get to know each other.

The key question, which i can safely say is very much in our 'domain' is the application of free energy tech.
Build it, sell it, show it, give it away. build another.
Alongside the machine needs to be the plan, the TAP intro letter, links, the whole shebang, all neatly wrapped up & presented to the peeps as a (more or less complete) package. If we don't do that, we will have serious problems.....

Everything is open sourced, so peeps can mess with it as they please, and no patents in sight.

Quote
They are abject failures.  That is the lesson to take.
That I am convinced that you have not learned said lessons.

And I am convinced that You don't see that there is a vast difference between these movements in a scarcity paradigm, where a number of People feel threatened through money issues mainly, and The Abundance Paradigm, which threatens only power over Others but does not take away materially - and in fact provides vastly more for most.

Guys, we need to learn the leson that we do need to be politically active.
I signed a petition to release gravity technology, that was a political act, was it not, Amy?
And we do have a vast difference--call it an edge over the competition-- we know what needs to be done.

Quote
Zorgon has embraced his dark side, or at least what I would usually interpret as darkness.  I, on the other hand, keep the beast caged.  That is the main reason why at times he has been capable of antagonising me to the extent that he does.  His own example is forcing me to confront an element of my own nature (more than one, in fact) which I am not prepared to accept.

Yes, he does that rather well ;)

Quote
Politics would be absolute moral suicide for me, Perhaps for you.  That does not mean that all political change is a bad thing.
True enough.
Quote
Mark my words.  Without a political move, the abundance paradigm is a pipe dream - probably for hundreds of years if not beyond an apocalypse.
I agree to disagree, although i think we may have only one crack at this, otherwise the transition may be delayed for centuries, or fail to happen at all.
I think it's worth fighting to give it a chance, we have nothing to lose, & a wonderful future to win.Maybe we won't live to see it happen, but it's our job to get the ball rolling and we are not alone, as i pointed out earlier.
OK Amy tends to look maybe too far ahead, but we need to agree on a course of action NOW & deal with the finer points later.

Quote
If it means we have to wait centuries, then perhaps we do; but the reality is that most people simply do not want what we are offering.  They have been taught not to want it.  They have been taught that it cannot work to such a degree, that they are not prepared to try.
Then let us start by un-teaching them.

Hi Z, sharp & to the point as always :)
I agree (mostly) with your post,
Quote
So you justify yourself by saying they are wrong, they have been taught wrong and whatever. Your plan has three laws of compliance or they will be removed (as i understand it)

Kinda sounds like "My way or the highway"
Well you can make it sound like that ::)
I tend to say something like 'we don't have a choice, the current system is going down & it will take us all down with it'.
As i already stated, most people have already adopted these laws from their own free will. The only block is the scarcity paradigm & the power they still have over us, which is nothing more than fancy advertising gimmicks. Like that 'Obama Vs. Romney' show...

Quote
Missionaries work to a point. The Jesuits converted a LOT of people over the centuries... (mostly with fear and brute force ) Jehovah's Witnesses and Mormons still send missionaries to my door. But Missionaries don't work very well on free thinkers   And this board has a lot of those
:) :) :)

Quote
And to build a new infra structure requires TONS of money, many manufacturers to give up time to make these new devices that everyone will get to use for free. Now I can envision a rich eccentric billionaire being so magnanimous to give all that away free... but he would still need a working model to mass produce.
You find the millionaire, we will build the machine :P
Quote
Well one thing is certain, while we debate the issue of cheap or free energy, the military industrialist are going full speed ahead using solar energy,synthetic fuel and oil and fusion power.  So while we suffer THEY are making it happen for their own uses... and I see not one EG device being used by them to generate the AWESOME power that they produce. Easily enough to power the planet several times over
Bingo!

Quote
Gee. Could We all live like that?  Or do We want to put Our energy into the system that lets Them live like that?  If We can all live like that, why is it Our duty to "earn" it?
It is our duty to help others, & thereby ourselves.
Simple, isn't it?
Shasta, i read that book, Asimov saw it too, & he had an answer for it.

Look at it another way, you would have the TIME to go & meet freinds while the robots do the laundry :)

Petrus, a great post.
As a CNC specialist, i agree you could automate nearly everything with a simple program that would not involve supercomputers, A.I. or laws of any kind (for robots).Just lots of sensors & a few subroutines like 'avoid squashing humans when working' stuff like that....
Asimov's thinking machines will have their own challenges, when (if) we get round to making them.
I have been able to write simple survival programs in basic for a model tank that allowed it to survive.
Of course, the more agressive it was, the better it survived.
Worked fine until they all turned on each other, the survival subroutine overcoming the friend/foe routine.
Fascinating to watch.....

Quote
You know... BEFORE that evil invention took over our lives people used to actually go OUT and meet each other at a coffee shop, or go to events, or parties...  Now today they are all locked in their caves playing video games, dating via yahoo and wasting their life in endless hours in silly forums

Hear hear! {sips his rare malt whiskey}

I would vote you King, Z. Not because you own this site, or the naked ladies dancing (well maybe) but because you are intelligent, fair,attentive & humerous. All the right qualities for a leader ;)
Quote
what a RUSH   There is NO WAY a robot could experience that for us

True, just as it is my bliss to do incredibly dangerous things like work on live cables in a wet cellar or fix a valve on top of a 300 foot cooling tower.
No pesky robot is going to take THAT pleasure away from me.
I will allow him to carry my lunchbox & roll cigarrettes for me :P

When i'm not doing that i will be with Sky Otter, sitting on the porch LOL!

Quote
If You want to stay put and change nothing, You don't have to.  BUT...  People who presently are living in poverty, starving, working a jobs They hate because that's all They can get, can CHOOSE to live like They do in rich neighborhoods - if They want to - without HAVING to go to a job They hate, without pumping Their energy into the system which allows only SOME of Us to live richly.

Exactly, that's worth fighting for.
I have a choice of things to eat tomorrow, a choice of jobs, even.
Many humans don't even have those simple choices, so i'm rich, relatively speaking.

It is my bliss to fix machines, maintain factories, & build newer, better machines.
People have become to hate their very existence, serving this vast machine we call government.
So i guess our message is for those of us who still have a choice, to help those who don't

And our message is also for those who think they don't have a choice, when they do

Most of all, our message is for people who do have a choice & are aware that they do.
Quote
Maybe because They have to deal with the issues of the imposed scarcity paradigm...
Yes, and that's going to defeat itself. When people are cold & hungry, they will be very quick to take an alternative view, especially when it's been seen to work

Aah, robots...
There are no dangers in using intelligent robots, providing they are well designed.
We are a long long way from making a sentient machine at this stage, it's a question for the future, not relevant now.
Besides, Asimov had all the robot problems covered way back when...

Did i miss anything?
 8)
« Last Edit: November 11, 2012, 03:25:50 pm by PLAYSWITHMACHINES »

Offline petrus4

  • Iconoclast
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2373
  • Gold 623
Re: The Ethical Planetarian Platform; Revision 002
« Reply #54 on: November 11, 2012, 05:40:34 pm »
Why do You not condone this?

Watch The Animatrix and/or Artificial Intelligence, Amy.   

Sentient AI is not something we want.  Most people are terrified of The Terminator's brand of cybernetic revolt, but Skynet was truthfully tame compared to what we could see happen.  Your initial position in TAP was correct, where Amelia wrote in her diary that generalised AI beyond a specific level would be unethical.  It is.

More specifically, humanoid robots are a problem for two other reasons.

a}  You have the potential for them to develop to the point where they are (to the naked eye, at least) completely indistinguishable from humans.  That was one of the possibilities which The Animatrix described; it's not a pretty picture.

b}  The above point raises potentially insoluble ontological questions; at least from a purely materialistic/atheistic standpoint.  This also both leads to, and originates from, Descartes' original belief that all forms of life are essentially just biological machines, and as such, completely disposable.

Viewing the universe and even living creatures as essentially soulless machines, moral compunctions about the treatment of a living, feeling being cease to apply. Max Velmans observes:-

"According to Descartes, only humans combine res cogitans (the stuff of consciousness) with res extensa (material stuff). Animals, which he refers to as 'brutes', are nothing more than unconscious machines."

Accordingly, Descartes' followers had no compunctions about nailing dogs up to boards and cutting them open to see how the parts worked, understanding their cries of pain as nothing more than the wheezing of bellows and the creaking of wheels. Fontenelle, one of Descartes' contemporaries, describes it like this:

"They administered beatings to dogs with perfect indifference, and made fun of those who pitied the creatures as if they had felt pain. They said that the animals were clocks; that the cries they emitted when struck, were only the noise of a little spring which had been touched, but that the whole body was without feeling. They nailed poor animals up on boards by their four paws to vivisect them and see the circulation of the blood."

See—here's the pump! Here are the bellows!

By this logic, the other objects of the universe, including living ones, do not really matter. They lack something that the self possesses. Morality applies to them no more than it applies to a blender, a clock. Suppose I take a soft plastic toy cat and replace its squeaker with a device that when squeezed made a sound just like a cat in mortal agony. When I stamp on it with my boot, I am not really causing suffering, only the appearance of suffering. I haven't done anything immoral (a little twisted, maybe, but not evil). If animals and indeed the entire universe are similarly insensate, bearing only the illusion of feeling, then the same moral license applies to the whole universe. Such is the implacable conclusion of the Galilean banishment of the subjective from the realm of scientific reality.

-- Charles Eisenstein, The Ascent of Humanity
« Last Edit: November 11, 2012, 05:44:33 pm by petrus4 »
"Sacred cows make the tastiest hamburgers."
        — Abbie Hoffman

Offline Amaterasu

  • The Roundtable
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6713
  • Gold 276
  • Information Will Free Us
    • T.A.P. - You're It
Re: The Ethical Planetarian Platform; Revision 002
« Reply #55 on: November 11, 2012, 05:59:11 pm »
That is THE problem.
Anything that they can get 'intellectual rights' on will merely create a new power struggle, since they will be quick to get it licensed, taxed, copyrighted, you name it, until it's just as expensive as oil.
They would get even richer while we will basically still be in the same brown stuff......

The ONLY way to avoid this is to open source EVERYTHING. Like FB said, you would be free to sell your machines (and the idea here is that you sell the machine for a SMALL profit, enough to buy the components for 2 more machines for example) but you will be required by law to include the full (open sourced) plans with the machine.

Um.  Only three Laws.  If We decide We want a statute or a code or a rule or a declaration or an decree or an act or a mandate or a constitution or a...whatever that deems this, I guess.  But I'm thinking those that did not disclose would not get sales if Others, more community minded, did.

If the expectations of the whole are presented ahead of time, and effectively We're on the same page, I figure things will move along briskly without adding much in the way of constrictions.

Quote
Also, being 'open source' means that people will be free to change the design, experimant with it etc, just like Android & other software. This means there will be continuous improvements made, free of charge :P

I think Linux is an awesome model of open source.  [smile]

Quote
Did i miss anything?
 8)

Not a thing.  [hugs]

As for action? Spread awareness.  Keep it in Consciousness.  If those of You with more than virtually nothing can come up with more specific stuff, add that to it.  But the first hurdle is to get awareness to the tipping point.  The easiest - costs nothing but the energy to talk/type.  The hardest - 10% must be aware and thinking about it.
"If the universe is made of mostly Dark Energy...can We use it to run Our cars?"

"If You want peace, take the profit out of war."

Offline Amaterasu

  • The Roundtable
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6713
  • Gold 276
  • Information Will Free Us
    • T.A.P. - You're It
Re: The Ethical Planetarian Platform; Revision 002
« Reply #56 on: November 11, 2012, 06:15:10 pm »
Watch The Animatrix and/or Artificial Intelligence, Amy.   

Sentient AI is not something we want.  Most people are terrified of The Terminator's brand of cybernetic revolt, but Skynet was truthfully tame compared to what we could see happen.  Your initial position in TAP was correct, where Amelia wrote in her diary that generalised AI beyond a specific level would be unethical.  It is.

More specifically, humanoid robots are a problem for two other reasons.

a}  You have the potential for them to develop to the point where they are (to the naked eye, at least) completely indistinguishable from humans.  That was one of the possibilities which The Animatrix described; it's not a pretty picture.

b}  The above point raises potentially insoluble ontological questions; at least from a purely materialistic/atheistic standpoint.  This also both leads to, and originates from, Descartes' original belief that all forms of life are essentially just biological machines, and as such, completely disposable.

Viewing the universe and even living creatures as essentially soulless machines, moral compunctions about the treatment of a living, feeling being cease to apply. Max Velmans observes:-

"According to Descartes, only humans combine res cogitans (the stuff of consciousness) with res extensa (material stuff). Animals, which he refers to as 'brutes', are nothing more than unconscious machines."

Accordingly, Descartes' followers had no compunctions about nailing dogs up to boards and cutting them open to see how the parts worked, understanding their cries of pain as nothing more than the wheezing of bellows and the creaking of wheels. Fontenelle, one of Descartes' contemporaries, describes it like this:

"They administered beatings to dogs with perfect indifference, and made fun of those who pitied the creatures as if they had felt pain. They said that the animals were clocks; that the cries they emitted when struck, were only the noise of a little spring which had been touched, but that the whole body was without feeling. They nailed poor animals up on boards by their four paws to vivisect them and see the circulation of the blood."

See—here's the pump! Here are the bellows!

By this logic, the other objects of the universe, including living ones, do not really matter. They lack something that the self possesses. Morality applies to them no more than it applies to a blender, a clock. Suppose I take a soft plastic toy cat and replace its squeaker with a device that when squeezed made a sound just like a cat in mortal agony. When I stamp on it with my boot, I am not really causing suffering, only the appearance of suffering. I haven't done anything immoral (a little twisted, maybe, but not evil). If animals and indeed the entire universe are similarly insensate, bearing only the illusion of feeling, then the same moral license applies to the whole universe. Such is the implacable conclusion of the Galilean banishment of the subjective from the realm of scientific reality.

-- Charles Eisenstein, The Ascent of Humanity

What's wrong with Asimov's Robot Laws?  And I think that things like sex robots will be unavoidable.

I also suspect that there were elements in these stories that either are non-applicable in an abundance paradigm, or did not enlist a Betterment Ethic/open source/stigmergic approach.  Will have to read these sometime.
"If the universe is made of mostly Dark Energy...can We use it to run Our cars?"

"If You want peace, take the profit out of war."

Offline petrus4

  • Iconoclast
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2373
  • Gold 623
Re: The Ethical Planetarian Platform; Revision 002
« Reply #57 on: November 11, 2012, 06:23:55 pm »
What's wrong with Asimov's Robot Laws?

They were made to be broken.  Asimov specifically intended them to be a literary coat hanger, or jumping off point for stories.  He created three seemingly plausible laws for robots to follow, and then wrote stories exploring various situations where said laws were violated.
"Sacred cows make the tastiest hamburgers."
        — Abbie Hoffman

PLAYSWITHMACHINES

  • Guest
Re: The Ethical Planetarian Platform; Revision 002
« Reply #58 on: November 12, 2012, 12:21:07 pm »
yes he did.
And he had to go to great lengths to invent scenarios where the laws could be broken. The zeroth law being the problem we may eventually have to face, that being about harming a human to save others. This led to a war among the robots, some holding the belief that they should serve humans no matter how crazy they are, and the other robots who reasoned that we should be protected from harming ourselves, by any means possible.
Again, this problem was eventually solved.
I reiterate that A.I. is a long way off from where we are now, it's not a problem for now.
Let's get back to the political stance of TAP.
How would we define 'reasonable force' when dealing with humans who would try to ruin the plan? Do we just banish them?
That could be the same as a death sentence..

However, i think it will be unavoidable. we would have to be able to deal with crime etc laws or not...since it would be work, or starve.
I know what i would choose to do.

Offline zorgon

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 21309
  • Gold 903
Re: The Ethical Planetarian Platform; Revision 002
« Reply #59 on: November 12, 2012, 12:57:58 pm »
Couple points....

Most people that hang out in forums and chat rooms are for the most part out of work and have nothing better to do :P Any real mover and shakers is too busy to come in here and share. I have written to several of them asking them to stop by and share and each one so far has written that they are too busy.

I myself can be here because the only work I have right now is what I can produce from home and that will soon need to take up more of my time before I run out of cash to pay the bills.

So spreading the word via the internet does work to a point, but it doesn't really reach those in position to make it happen

The other point is back to human nature.

People have a sheep mentality... or more correctly a herd mentality. As such the majority of people NEED a leader. No amount of trying to 'wake up the sheep' will work BECAUSE they LIKE being sheep.  I have seen this happen myself in our Medieval world. As long as the leader has a good working idea, you WILL have loyal willing 'serfs'

It is the same principal at work in cults and governments. People need a leader... they will ALWAYS seek a leader.  Now a leader can be benevolent or a tyrant... doesn't matter both work though the tyrants don't usually last as long.

This is not something that can be changed by any paradigm... it is the very nature of the beast... and those in power today, as well as all those dictators, clan chiefs, spiritual leaders, what have you,  KNOW the truth of this and use it to their advantage.

You can use this for TAP, but you will need to put something on the table that they can sink their teeth into.

Hitler got as far as he did because a) he had amazing powers of speech to sell his plan; b) he gave Germans that were out of work and starving jobs, the Volkswagon (people's car) and a speed limitless autobahn AND he gave them a target for their frustration. Though he was definitely not a nice guy :P as people discovered afterwards, he nevertheless knew the secret of Sheep :D


 


Wal-Mart.com USA, LLC
affiliate_link
Free Click Tracking
Wal-Mart.com USA, LLC

* Recent Posts

Re: Music You Love by RUSSO
[Today at 02:12:02 am]


Re: kits to feed your family for a year by Shasta56
[March 17, 2024, 12:40:48 pm]


Re: kits to feed your family for a year by space otter
[March 16, 2024, 08:45:27 pm]


Re: kits to feed your family for a year by Shasta56
[March 16, 2024, 07:24:38 pm]


Re: kits to feed your family for a year by space otter
[March 16, 2024, 10:41:21 am]


Re: Full Interview - Lance Corporal Jonathan Weygandt (1997) by RUSSO
[March 12, 2024, 07:22:56 pm]


Re: Full Interview - Lance Corporal Jonathan Weygandt (1997) by RUSSO
[March 09, 2024, 03:25:56 am]


Re: Full Interview - Lance Corporal Jonathan Weygandt (1997) by RUSSO
[March 09, 2024, 02:33:38 am]


Re: Music You Love by RUSSO
[March 09, 2024, 01:10:22 am]


Re: The Man Who Built UFOs For The CIA (Not Bob Lazar!) by RUSSO
[March 09, 2024, 12:14:14 am]


Re: Full Interview - Lance Corporal Jonathan Weygandt (1997) by RUSSO
[March 09, 2024, 12:08:46 am]


Re: A peculiar stone in DeForest by Canine
[March 03, 2024, 11:54:22 am]


Re: The Man Who Built UFOs For The CIA (Not Bob Lazar!) by kevin
[March 03, 2024, 11:30:06 am]


Re: The Man Who Built UFOs For The CIA (Not Bob Lazar!) by kevin
[March 03, 2024, 11:21:15 am]


Re: The Man Who Built UFOs For The CIA (Not Bob Lazar!) by kevin
[March 03, 2024, 11:16:05 am]


Re: Music You Love by RUSSO
[March 02, 2024, 07:58:09 pm]


Re: Full Interview - Lance Corporal Jonathan Weygandt (1997) by RUSSO
[March 02, 2024, 07:50:59 pm]


Re: The Man Who Built UFOs For The CIA (Not Bob Lazar!) by RUSSO
[March 02, 2024, 07:43:03 pm]


Re: The Man Who Built UFOs For The CIA (Not Bob Lazar!) by RUSSO
[March 02, 2024, 07:41:30 pm]


Re: The Man Who Built UFOs For The CIA (Not Bob Lazar!) by kevin
[March 01, 2024, 11:54:23 am]