953 replies to this topic

[QuestforLife]

Do people think having ubi and being able to do whatever you want will be terrible? I agree with mind's point that what govt gives, govt can take away so absolute compliance might be required to get ubi. That is a political problem and needs a political solution. Governments have been overreaching more and more every year. Will ai lead to total control by our politicians or can we carve out some freedom? Really, the only problems I see are political

One of the points I was trying to make was that nothing is political, it is all technological. Politics follows technology.

[QuestforLife]

Interesting. I am working on a similar device, just smaller and cheaper so that small gardeners and organic farmers can use them. The big robot from Carbon Robotics, are uber-expensive and meant for industrial agriculture. What would be better for the environment is to empower smaller more eco-friendly food production.

That's great Mind. Small scale technology. Gardening is already very efficient. It is just very time consuming at present.

[pamojja]

That's great Mind. Small scale technology. Gardening is already very efficient. It is just very time consuming at present.

 

I thought so too. Long ago I learned gardening for 3 years in an own vegetable garden. Initial work is of course intense. But after 2-3 years one learns so much, it then almost runs on its own. For exampled, by mainly using plants which can be harvested repeatedly, mulching and automated irrigation, a few natural inexpensive pesticides tricks. All supercharged with organic fertilization.
 

[adamh]

Interesting. I am working on a similar device, just smaller and cheaper so that small gardeners and organic farmers can use them. The big robot from Carbon Robotics, are uber-expensive and meant for industrial agriculture. What would be better for the environment is to empower smaller more eco-friendly food production.

 

Oh sure, the cannon came before the rifle or handgun. The market for industrial size machines is probably bigger than the home market so they went there first. We went from the airplane to the hand held uav drone but it took some time. I think it should be used mostly at night since many insects hide during the day from predators and come out when its dark

 

Drones could take the place of security guards. They will patrol a large area or sit in a tree with motion activation. Breakins or fires are seen and swiftly stopped by alerting authorities. With facial recognition software, you know who came by when you were out. A bot like that might cost as little as $500 and works 24/7. I'll take one.

[adamh]

One of the points I was trying to make was that nothing is political, it is all technological. Politics follows technology.

 

I would not bet on that. Taking a look at what us govt has done as well as what china is doing now to their people, I think taking political control is most important. We all seem to agree that ai has huge possible benefits and huge possible dangers. Having the right government policies and the right leaders in place makes all the difference.

 

In china you are spied on constantly especially if you are a foreigner. To enter buildings, to use the bathroom, or board a bus or train, they want to see your phone showing you are a good citizen. They can take away privileges for any reason. The govt is so strong in china that only a massive uprising and a revolution could overcome it. There have been many such revolts but they just protest and nothing happens

 

The uk is following that path, if you "misgender" someone the police may come to your door and arrest you. No warrant is needed to kick down your door, they just need a tip or suspicion that you are doing something wrong. Its not to late to take back rights but they are a ways down the path toward china totalitarianism.

 

In usa they are rolling out facial recognition, they search posts for anti govt talk. They are working on usdc which is a digital dollar. They will be able to block you from spending it on unapproved items even if they are legal. They can impose a negative interest so that your bank balance constantly drops forcing you to spend it. Or, for those truly naughty, they can stop you from spending your own money totally, just take it away from you

 

Everyone of those problems has a political solution. 

[QuestforLife]

I would not bet on that. Taking a look at what us govt has done as well as what china is doing now to their people, I think taking political control is most important. We all seem to agree that ai has huge possible benefits and huge possible dangers. Having the right government policies and the right leaders in place makes all the difference.

 

In china you are spied on constantly especially if you are a foreigner. To enter buildings, to use the bathroom, or board a bus or train, they want to see your phone showing you are a good citizen. They can take away privileges for any reason. The govt is so strong in china that only a massive uprising and a revolution could overcome it. There have been many such revolts but they just protest and nothing happens

 

The uk is following that path, if you "misgender" someone the police may come to your door and arrest you. No warrant is needed to kick down your door, they just need a tip or suspicion that you are doing something wrong. Its not to late to take back rights but they are a ways down the path toward china totalitarianism.

 

In usa they are rolling out facial recognition, they search posts for anti govt talk. They are working on usdc which is a digital dollar. They will be able to block you from spending it on unapproved items even if they are legal. They can impose a negative interest so that your bank balance constantly drops forcing you to spend it. Or, for those truly naughty, they can stop you from spending your own money totally, just take it away from you

 

Everyone of those problems has a political solution. 

 

Firstly, the tyrannies you are discussing are at the very least enabled by technology: the worst tyrant of 100 years ago could not dream of controlling their citizens in the manner of modern day governments. I call this the 'weak' technology-precedes-politics argument. But it leaves at least a small ray of hope that perhaps with the right policies, eternally vigilant, tyranny could be avoided. But I think all hope of this is gone now.

 

The 'strong' technology-precedes-politics argument goes further and says that not only does technology ENABLE greater control, it actually REQUIRES it. I'll give you an example. The Internet appeared and was awesome: we could all talk about anything we wanted with like-minded people across the globe. But when that empowered populism, say electing Trump or voting for Brexit, bureaucrats in those countries then had to work double time for years to stop these events throwing a wrench into the 'System' and causing it all to crash. Or look at the online backlash against huge waves of immigration into developed countries. It can't be allowed because massive pension schemes could collapse and all those boomers wouldn't get their payments. So suddenly the beautiful and free Internet gets clamped down and anyone speaking out on Twitter, Facebook, YouTube, etc., gets banned. Okay so Musk has pushed back against this a little, but ultimately the system can't allow freedom. 

 

Note that I am not saying the System will definitely survive. Only that it will need to exert greater and greater control in order to survive.    

Edited by QuestforLife, 14 July 2023 - 09:28 AM.

[adamh]

Firstly, the tyrannies you are discussing are at the very least enabled by technology: the worst tyrant of 100 years ago could not dream of controlling their citizens in the manner of modern day governments. I call this the 'weak' technology-precedes-politics argument. But it leaves at least a small ray of hope that perhaps with the right policies, eternally vigilant, tyranny could be avoided. But I think all hope of this is gone now.

 

The 'strong' technology-precedes-politics argument goes further and says that not only does technology ENABLE greater control, it actually REQUIRES it. I'll give you an example. The Internet appeared and was awesome: we could all talk about anything we wanted with like-minded people across the globe. But when that empowered populism, say electing Trump or voting for Brexit, bureaucrats in those countries then had to work double time for years to stop these events throwing a wrench into the 'System' and causing it all to crash. Or look at the online backlash against huge waves of immigration into developed countries. It can't be allowed because massive pension schemes could collapse and all those boomers wouldn't get their payments. So suddenly the beautiful and free Internet gets clamped down and anyone speaking out on Twitter, Facebook, YouTube, etc., gets banned. Okay so Musk has pushed back against this a little, but ultimately the system can't allow freedom. 

 

Note that I am not saying the System will definitely survive. Only that it will need to exert greater and greater control in order to survive.    

You said politics follows technology, here you seem to say technology leads to tyranny. They are already using technology to spy on us, thats why I said we need to get the political system under control. Now in usa, cheating in elections seems to have become the norm. Will there ever be another honest election? That seems to be in doubt at the moment

 

If technology can lead to tyranny, like in china just for example, then cleaning up politics becomes imperative. Right now its possible, but after the uniparty wins another election or two it will all be fake. You won't be able to vote out the ruling party any more than a lowly chinese citizen can vote to put xi jianping out on the street.

 

The internet is still working, the clampdown on twitter et al have lead to exposing those activities by govt to suppress speech. 

 

Did you know that biden has a body double and that one time speaking with boris johnson the double revealed he was not the real one. He even told his real name. An old actor made up to look like the dementia patient in chief. Here is the link is it true? Its already been revealed that "biden" at times wears a latex mask. Do a search, they found wrinkles and creases in it. Biden Body Double Blows Cover During Meet with Boris Johnson (substack.com)

[QuestforLife]

You said politics follows technology, here you seem to say technology leads to tyranny. They are already using technology to spy on us, thats why I said we need to get the political system under control. Now in usa, cheating in elections seems to have become the norm. Will there ever be another honest election? That seems to be in doubt at the moment

 

If technology can lead to tyranny, like in china just for example, then cleaning up politics becomes imperative. Right now its possible, but after the uniparty wins another election or two it will all be fake. You won't be able to vote out the ruling party any more than a lowly chinese citizen can vote to put xi jianping out on the street.

 

The internet is still working, the clampdown on twitter et al have lead to exposing those activities by govt to suppress speech. 

 

Did you know that biden has a body double and that one time speaking with boris johnson the double revealed he was not the real one. He even told his real name. An old actor made up to look like the dementia patient in chief. Here is the link is it true? Its already been revealed that "biden" at times wears a latex mask. Do a search, they found wrinkles and creases in it. Biden Body Double Blows Cover During Meet with Boris Johnson (substack.com)

 

I agree wholeheartedly with the problems you discuss and the need to address them, I just don't think they can be fixed by politics.

 

(Tyrannical) politics - where they can't afford to let you vote for anything real, spy on your 24-7, etc., are in my view a result of increasing technological complexity. Politics is structured this way to try and control and serve the needs of the technological behemoth. It can't do that if there are large numbers of empowered people motivated against it. You could make an argument that government should be restructured to do this job better - but in my view that would just make it more tyrannical (but less incompetent). 

[adamh]

"I agree wholeheartedly with the problems you discuss and the need to address them, I just don't think they can be fixed by politics."

 

Perhaps we are talking about 2 different things. I'm talking about cleaning up government, stopping the bribery in all its many forms. Also putting into place safeguards so that they can't just print up a few million ballots and sneak them in. We need a paper trail in which each person gets a receipt for their vote and its cross checked against the list of registered voters. Of course we need photo id to vote, unbelievably some places in usa do not require it and even let illegal immigrants vote

 

If we can do that we will have an honest govt and will not need to worry about them spying on us. An honest govt will do what the people want, not what the big donors want. Technology does not make people do dishonest things, putting the temptation of stealing millions of dollars makes people do bad things.

 

The latest trick of the crooked politician is the book deal. Big pharma or big whatever wants the president to do something that will help it and the public loses. They make a deal so that after office, they have a ghost writer crank out something under the former presidents name and a big book publisher gives many millions of dollars up front. The book is a snoozer and they have to give it away but the crooked politician has his money and it looks legit though its not

 

There are other ways to steal, obama did the book deal, some presidents like reagan take a speaking fee, he got $2M for a speech in japan and just by coincidence, made japan a most favored nation in trade just before leaving office. Other ways are like nancy pelosi who trades stocks on inside information she gets by being on big committees. 

 

When you have that going on it makes no difference about the technology. With corruption at the top, all the evils we talked about come to be. With honest people at the top, we have a wonderful world. Even if they are only honest to stay out of jail, it still works

[QuestforLife]

"I agree wholeheartedly with the problems you discuss and the need to address them, I just don't think they can be fixed by politics."

 

Perhaps we are talking about 2 different things. I'm talking about cleaning up government, stopping the bribery in all its many forms. Also putting into place safeguards so that they can't just print up a few million ballots and sneak them in. We need a paper trail in which each person gets a receipt for their vote and its cross checked against the list of registered voters. Of course we need photo id to vote, unbelievably some places in usa do not require it and even let illegal immigrants vote

 

If we can do that we will have an honest govt and will not need to worry about them spying on us. An honest govt will do what the people want, not what the big donors want. Technology does not make people do dishonest things, putting the temptation of stealing millions of dollars makes people do bad things.

 

The latest trick of the crooked politician is the book deal. Big pharma or big whatever wants the president to do something that will help it and the public loses. They make a deal so that after office, they have a ghost writer crank out something under the former presidents name and a big book publisher gives many millions of dollars up front. The book is a snoozer and they have to give it away but the crooked politician has his money and it looks legit though its not

 

There are other ways to steal, obama did the book deal, some presidents like reagan take a speaking fee, he got $2M for a speech in japan and just by coincidence, made japan a most favored nation in trade just before leaving office. Other ways are like nancy pelosi who trades stocks on inside information she gets by being on big committees. 

 

When you have that going on it makes no difference about the technology. With corruption at the top, all the evils we talked about come to be. With honest people at the top, we have a wonderful world. Even if they are only honest to stay out of jail, it still works

 

 

We are talking about the same thing. 

 

Let us say we manage to clean up politics and restore democracy. Populists then start getting elected everywhere. They break up the oligarchy of globalist interests, close down various bureaucratic functions, etc. Then the system falls over, economic crisis ensues, lots of people starve.

 

You might say, no, the new leaders will govern better than the current incompetents. Okay then. Let's say we move to a CEO model and Elon Musk becomes our new world leader. He starts off wanting to clean everything up and make it accountable to the masses. But then realises the population of the developed world is basically old and dependant on continuing pension payments that require GDP growth, the technology the modern economy needs to work is globalised and needs 100 countries working together to keep the supply chain going, and Africa has 10x the population is could possibly sustain without constant outside aid. He touches one thing slightly wrong and the whole thing goes down. He decides starting again on Mars in a better option!

 

The conclusion is that technology of the type we are using now is a TRAP. Every year this situation goes on makes the eventual CRASH worse. 

 

We badly need to move back to a local model with simpler technology. But who knows if that is even possible now.   

[dlewis1453]

We badly need to move back to a local model with simpler technology. But who knows if that is even possible now.   

 

What would that look like in practice? I am imagining communities of about 100k people or so that are largely self-governing with regards to local matters. These communities would be growing a large surplus of their own organic food with assistance from robotic farming technology, engaging in small scale manufacturing, doing R&D in local labs. Is that what you have in mind? We would still probably want the internet though, since it greatly facilitates the sharing of information and improves productivity. But maybe social media should be limited to a very primitive form, such as a forum in the model of Longecity or the earliest version of Facebook. AI would be banned of course. 

 

I just don't see how this sort of social structure could be maintained without a heavy handed government. Network effects lead to humans wanting to migrate into larger and denser cities. Technology will continue to evolve without government constraining or directing its evolution. 

[QuestforLife]

I just don't see how this sort of social structure could be maintained without a heavy handed government.

What definitely won't work: continuing as we are.

What definitely will work (but is undesirable): hunter gathering.

What will most likely work: pre industrial society

What will most likely not work: keep high tech, but try and constrain it to a small scale.

In any case, small scale will mean high tech as we have it now won't work. Each country or region would have to fend for itself. As it is, many countries couldn't survive as a modern nation (most of Africa, parts of Asia), some will but in reduced form (UK, Europe, China), and the good old USofA will be mostly fine as it is big enough (with Canada, Mexico and S.America) to build its own supply chains. So yes, you'd need to restrain things politically, and that's not sustainable. But given the current path, i.e., De-globalisation, aging timebomb, anti-immigration feeling, it looks like the world will give this last compromise a go, and maybe it will buy us time to come up with something better.

[Mind]

What would that look like in practice? I am imagining communities of about 100k people or so that are largely self-governing with regards to local matters. These communities would be growing a large surplus of their own organic food with assistance from robotic farming technology, engaging in small scale manufacturing, doing R&D in local labs. Is that what you have in mind? We would still probably want the internet though, since it greatly facilitates the sharing of information and improves productivity. But maybe social media should be limited to a very primitive form, such as a forum in the model of Longecity or the earliest version of Facebook. AI would be banned of course. 

 

I just don't see how this sort of social structure could be maintained without a heavy handed government. Network effects lead to humans wanting to migrate into larger and denser cities. Technology will continue to evolve without government constraining or directing its evolution. 

 

In some parts of the world, like the US, the most recent trend is for people to move out of big, mismanaged, dirty, violent cities. They are moving to smaller communities exactly because technology is making it easier to do so. Everything from remote work to telemedicine to high speed internet make it easier to move.

 

That being said - even though smaller decentralized diverse communities are more robust and healthy - the cabal of billionaire global elites/politicians are fighting tooth and nail against it at every turn. They won't allow decentralization without a fight - probably a deadly fight.

 

You want a small tight-knit community, decentralized currency, locally grown organic food, freedom, etc...

 

They want to force you to eat lab-grown food or bugs. They want to "hack your biology". They want to control the currency. They want you to live in crammed cities in a "pod". They don't want you to travel around the world.

[adamh]

Questforlife wrote:

 

"Let us say we manage to clean up politics and restore democracy. Populists then start getting elected everywhere. They break up the oligarchy of globalist interests, close down various bureaucratic functions, etc. Then the system falls over, economic crisis ensues, lots of people starve."

 

Wait, you say we clean everything up and do things right and then the system falls over? There is a major disconnect there. We have honest politicians listening to the people and then what is it that goes wrong in your distopian vision?

 

Then you talk about musk running the world and wanting to move us to mars. That sounds like a joke. Then you say:

 

"The conclusion is that technology of the type we are using now is a TRAP. Every year this situation goes on makes the eventual CRASH worse."

 

You continually make these claims, that no matter what we do it will crash. But you don't take us from point A to point B in a logical fashion. You declare as a fact that a cleaned up government will fail without telling us why. Then you leap to the conclusion that technology is bad

 

"We badly need to move back to a local model with simpler technology. But who knows if that is even possible now."

 

Why would that be better?

[adamh]

Mind wrote:

 

"even though smaller decentralized diverse communities are more robust and healthy - the cabal of billionaire global elites/politicians are fighting tooth and nail against it at every turn. They won't allow decentralization without a fight - probably a deadly fight."

 

Smaller cities have usually less crime and a better style of life. Large cities are dirty, noisy and full of crime so naturally some people are moving out of them. But, big cities are where you can make money so people go there for the opportunities, perhaps with a dream of someday retiring to the country side.

 

By decentralized, do you mean spread out, and why is a diverse community better? We hear from the major media constantly that diversity is our strength but that is a lie. Perhaps you mean diverse occupations, some farmers, some departments stores, etc and having everything needed within driving distance?

 

"You want a small tight-knit community, decentralized currency, locally grown organic food, freedom, etc..."

 

You want a new currency for each community? That has rarely gone well, or perhaps something like bitcoin? Maybe trade with gold, silver, copper and other goods? That could be nice but it would not exist in a vacuum, the rest of the country, rest of the world would have an influence. People act better in small towns, usually, but human nature remains the same. It would not be mayberry, it would be much like many small towns we have now

 

AI and the improved productivity it brings could allow people to live where they wish without worrying about a job. We still have to keep the government out of our business

[QuestforLife]

 

"The conclusion is that technology of the type we are using now is a TRAP. Every year this situation goes on makes the eventual CRASH worse."

 

You continually make these claims, that no matter what we do it will crash. But you don't take us from point A to point B in a logical fashion. You declare as a fact that a cleaned up government will fail without telling us why. Then you leap to the conclusion that technology is bad

 

 

 

For reference:

 

In post 682 I talked about why technology appears to give us freedom, but ends up taking it away.

In post 687 I talked about why big tech is BIG (needs scale).

In post 696 I talked about why this needs a lot of organisation and hence big government. 

 

If you mess up this big government, and by this I include various bureaucratic functions like the civil service (the permanent government), the system can't operate and will crash. I've given various examples like globalised supply chains. Let me talk about another one local to the UK. In 2016 the people recognising that their country was no longer sovereign, having the most important issues decided for it by the EU bureaucratic apparatus, voted to leave. The UK system went into absolute meltdown. Only after many years and multiple elections has the UK actually left, and to be honest, it is still a mess. 

 

You might argue that is just political incompetence and AI will do it all better. But then you are just creating a more tyrannical system of government. 

 

And conversely,  a tyrannical government will be what is required to control AI risks, genetic weapons, etc.,  etc., i.e. all the things enabled by technology.

 

 

Edited by QuestforLife, 21 July 2023 - 11:12 AM.

[adamh]

For reference:

 

In post 682 I talked about why technology appears to give us freedom, but ends up taking it away.

In post 687 I talked about why big tech is BIG (needs scale).

In post 696 I talked about why this needs a lot of organisation and hence big government. 

 

If you mess up this big government, and by this I include various bureaucratic functions like the civil service (the permanent government), the system can't operate and will crash. I've given various examples like globalised supply chains. Let me talk about another one local to the UK. In 2016 the people recognising that their country was no longer sovereign, having the most important issues decided for it by the EU bureaucratic apparatus, voted to leave. The UK system went into absolute meltdown. Only after many years and multiple elections has the UK actually left, and to be honest, it is still a mess. 

 

You might argue that is just political incompetence and AI will do it all better. But then you are just creating a more tyrannical system of government. 

 

And conversely,  a tyrannical government will be what is required to control AI risks, genetic weapons, etc.,  etc., i.e. all the things enabled by technology.

 

Ok you are starting to flesh out and support your idea though you can't expect people to go back and look at your other posts to see what you meant in this post. What do you mean by "mess up" this government, be specific? We talked about bribery of various kinds and theft from government as well as rogue elements taking control to spy on us, are those the things you think are inevitable? 

[QuestforLife]

Ok you are starting to flesh out and support your idea though you can't expect people to go back and look at your other posts to see what you meant in this post. What do you mean by "mess up" this government, be specific? We talked about bribery of various kinds and theft from government as well as rogue elements taking control to spy on us, are those the things you think are inevitable?

I'm not sure about bribery - that would be an example of less effective government - but certainly spying. I'd say in a modern Western nation, I.e., a multi ethnic, multi religion, multi cultural ... mess, it's essential to some degree.

[Mind]

Mind wrote:

 

 

By decentralized, do you mean spread out, and why is a diverse community better?

 

On the subject of diversity, I am speaking in scientific terms. Diverse ecosystems are robust. Companies with diverse product offerings are robust. One-size-fits-all systems are fragile and prone to collapse. Diverse communities with diverse economic systems, rules of governance, and currencies would be more resilient. One or two of the communities could crash/collapse without bringing the entire world down with it.

[adamh]

On the subject of diversity, I am speaking in scientific terms. Diverse ecosystems are robust. Companies with diverse product offerings are robust. One-size-fits-all systems are fragile and prone to collapse. Diverse communities with diverse economic systems, rules of governance, and currencies would be more resilient. One or two of the communities could crash/collapse without bringing the entire world down with it.

 

Ok you are using the word diversity in a logical way. The current popular definition of diversity is having as many blacks, women, gays, trans, and so on in a group and as few as possible of white males. This of course leads to the opposite of diversity which is what 'they' want. 

 

A company having a diverse product offering has more resilience than a company with only one product. If demand goes way down for that product one year, the company could face a crisis or go out of business. On the other hand, we have seen companies that tried to expand into new areas they had little experience with and it ended disastrously. This may be about to happen with electric cars and has happened many times in the past with new products

 

Ecosystems need to be balanced, more so than super diverse. This of course requires them to have many different types, predators, prey, plants, decomposers and so on. But adding more different species does not always bring a benefit. The new plant or animal could be invasive and cause the ecosystem to crash taking many years to adjust and perhaps never coming back to the balance it once had

 

It seems to me that a certain degree of diversity and complexity is desirable but too much or the wrong mix will bring problems. When you come to sociology, too much is clearly a problem. Having a group whose members all speak different languages, would not be a cohesive group. All having different cultures also is a problem. We can learn from other cultures but we don't want it shoved in our faces all day long. 

 

What modern day liberal civilization seems to want is diversity in ethnicity and sexuality but uniformity in thought. You are expected to believe various impossible things like changing your clothes changes your sex and a trans woman is a real woman. No diversity in thought is permitted, you are expected to toe the liberal line or be attacked as a right winger.

[QuestforLife]

The woke 'diversity max' stuff is strange.

On the one hand we can see that the 'system' needs to be able to move people around the globe to where they are needed, and for that they can't have too much local ethnic pushback. Hence 'diversity is our strength'; if you are against mass immigration you are 'racist' or a 'fascist', etc.

But at the same time the activism of the groups spearheading these campaigns have reached such an anti-white, anti-male, anti-tradition fever pitch, that even immigrants are pushing back against it. And that is to say nothing of the large number of white males who are now alienated and of no use to the system (despite their talents). The system doesn't want this, so I predict the woke stuff will be toned down in the near future. Which will be a relief.

But it is such a balancing act to keep everyone happy, and many activists who 'need a cause' may be hard to divert or reign in. For example, the 'Green Lobby' now seems unstoppable regardless of a workable geography for renewables in your local country. And this is probably what the system wants, as they are aware > 8 billion people aspiring to a western lifestyle is not possible or sustainable.

So in summary I see a competent government reigning in diversity quotas amongst much gnashing of teeth in the media, but green targets remaining in place and perhaps getting even more extreme.

Edited by QuestforLife, 23 July 2023 - 03:50 PM.

[adamh]

Now you are getting the big picture. They want to divide us and have us fight against each other. That makes it harder to organize and throw the bums out. It makes it harder to see what is going on. They use race but also gay vs straight, and other things to divide us. As for those looming 8B people, the covid vaccine will trim that number down some and if that isn't enough they have other tricks up the sleeve, starvation for one. 

 

The lunacy has pervaded the universities, degrees in womens studies, gender studies, queer theory, and similar sounding courses. I actually met a woman who taught a yoga class and had a degree in womans studies. She was studying for her masters in the same field. I asked what job she expected, she said director of a womans shelter or rape crisis center. I wondering how many such jobs come open in an average year? How many thousands or millions of students taking courses that will not help them much in life and which saddles them with heavy student debt are also looking for a job like that? I doubt that director of a womans shelter gets big bucks even if she landed the job with no actual experience in the field. Don't those places usually promote from within?

 

Funny how the west torpedoed the grain deal. Yes you read that right, the west torpedoed it not evil putin. Neither ukraine nor the eu has met its commitments under the grain deal. Russia was supposed to get certain things, be able to ship their own grain out of more ports and other commitments. The west did not meet a single term they had agreed to.

 

Getting off the topic a little but look at all the things going on world wide to lower food production. Thousands of farms in netherlands are being shut down over concerns about nitrogen use. Food processing facilities in many countries have been hit by fires and various problems. Food prices are already at all time highs and every day more bad news. Droughts, floods, fires, pestilence, war, all the 4 horsemen.

[QuestforLife]

 

Getting off the topic a little but look at all the things going on world wide to lower food production. Thousands of farms in netherlands are being shut down over concerns about nitrogen use. Food processing facilities in many countries have been hit by fires and various problems. Food prices are already at all time highs and every day more bad news. Droughts, floods, fires, pestilence, war, all the 4 horsemen.

 

It is hard to say if this is evidence of nefarious types wanting to cause starvation or just incompetence. After all, no one really wants to run out of food. I suspect it is more of the latter. After all, labour, even unskilled labour, is still very much in demand. At some point this might change. 

 

Intentional or not, food scarcity is definitely coming down the pipe. Africa is where it will hit hardest. 

[Mind]

It is hard to say if this is evidence of nefarious types wanting to cause starvation or just incompetence. After all, no one really wants to run out of food. I suspect it is more of the latter. After all, labour, even unskilled labour, is still very much in demand. At some point this might change. 

 

Intentional or not, food scarcity is definitely coming down the pipe. Africa is where it will hit hardest. 

 

As pointed out  (and on topic) people posted earlier about how agricultural robots are now emerging into the marketplace. Perhaps they will become ubiquitous just in time to prevent widespread food shortages.

 

What I know from following the food topic for the last 2 decades, is that NONE of the dire predictions have ever come true. Starvation (and poverty in general) are purely results of political problems in the modern day.

[QuestforLife]

What I know from following the food topic for the last 2 decades, is that NONE of the dire predictions have ever come true. Starvation (and poverty in general) are purely results of political problems in the modern day.

The post war 'pax americana' period is highly atypical. Think how unusual it is to have a global hegemon guarantee food shipments around the world. So many countries live off that. But the globalised world order is going away (America doesn't need to fight the USSR anymore and has enough food), Ukraine and Russsia are no longer exporting, and Europe's loss of Russian oil and gas means they've massively scaled back fertiliser production. A famine is coming, and coming soon. Not in the US. Not in Europe (though price rises will be felt). But Africa, the Middle East and parts of Asia will suffer.

[adamh]

A famine is not typically having nothing at all to eat, its when food costs too much to afford, that is famine. By the way russia is still exporting grain and other food along with fertilizer, ukraine is working something out by rail or truck. Prices are going inexorably up. As for whether there are forces working to limit food production, there are groups who want this. There are many working to increase food supply but they are losing the battle to those who want a decrease and the weather is working against us. 

 

Nederlands forcing farmers to shut down is a political decision and the public did not like it. The dutch government has lost support and will have to call elections so that decision might be reversed later on but the damage is done. I think there will be a food crunch this year and next, possibly after that things might normalize a bit. The food shortage will be global, food follows money so it will be the poor who feel it most.

 

Those ai agricultural machines are in early stages and very costly. A co-op or farmers group could possibly buy one and share it but when crops are all growing at once you need a machine for almost every crop depending on size. There are winter crops, spring crops, summer and fall crops so one machine could work almost all year around. The good thing about it is no pesticides or herbicides so if they charge more they can get a premium and even get organic certified. But these things take time and the disasters are happening now

 

We have had mass starvation in the past, those predictions did come true. You merely have to look at global weather patterns to see that food production will be down. It won't get to the point that no one has food, it will be the rich grumbling over prices and the poor actually doing without. Not just africa but many parts of the globe are having problems whether related to political decisions, weather patterns or incompetence it doesn't matter. The fact is food production is down and dropping further

[pamojja]

A very long but interesting podcast:

 

[Mind]

A very long but interesting podcast:

 

 

This is a very good podcast, but also very disturbing. Sure, they talk about unemployment and society destroying disruption possible with AI, but they at least are optimistic about guiding AI toward positive outcomes.

 

The more disturbing part is when they talk about AI and health. As LongeCity members have known for A LONG time, there are a lot of biohacks and interventions that can cure a lot of ailments. Members have been sharing positive stories and data for over 2 decades. In this podcast they talk about some of these cheap and easy interventions that have been known for years, yet most people are not aware of (after about the 55 minute mark). They used AI to search for little known cures/interventions. Unfortunately for most people, they go to the medical industrial complex in the US and get prescribed very expensive pharmaceuticals that don't cure anything - just kind-of paper over the symptoms - and come with a litany of serious side effects. So disturbing and sad.

[pamojja]

So disturbing and sad.

 

Huch, remember it differently. He used AI to find relieve for his sun, alledgedly it worked after years of effort. But only mentioned as an example an actually cheap pharmaceutical.

 

What did indeed give me hope in this talk, beside all the disturbing outcome from most large companies wanting to develop god-like AGI, that he actually invests in lesser capable but already  implementable specific use AI, easily transfered into different cultural context too. Making AI available through smartphones to African children for example, for a very different and very individualized education. Or individualized healthcare, outside the pharmaceutical box, also for sharing especially in the Southern half of this world. AI for everyone.

I wasn't really aware how AI worked, and thought one would at least neat a graphics processors to run. Apparently its something completely different to any compression, so that only principles knowing and predicting are stored, fitting on something like a 500GB stick.

[adamh]

We will use 'good' ai to combat the 'bad' ai used of course by the enemy. We should use it to find holes in our own security and plug those holes. That would be an example of using ai to fight ai. We will of course keep all the weapons that are spin offs of this, just in case. 

 

In the spirit of make merry for tomorrow we may die, back to the positives in finding new cures. That is a huge thing, I myself with limited ability to find things have stumbled upon at least a dozen "hacks" some treating conditions doctors say there is no cure. That may be technically true, I only found treatments not cures but they were amazing. So why are cheap life hacks which are perfectly safe or minimal risk of a problem always hidden and you have to read the right article to find it?

 

I think we know exactly what the problem is in finding these buried treatments or cures. It$ $omething to do with money, oh I meant to say of course its to protect all of us from snake oil salesmen. Since the herbs haven't passed rigorous and highly expensive govt mandated tests, no claims can be made. The lawyer$ are paying close attention