Albert Posted December 9, 2016 Report Share Posted December 9, 2016 So an other point of the Scala is already taken I think World Peace is of all this the most impossible. Probably because of how people treat each other and how selfcentered they are. I had this guy who paid off his debt to me, then two weeks later his sister finds out about it and calls me saying they had a lot of other debts already and didn't feel like they really had to pay that since they didn't have to pay the other debts and wondered if they could have the money back and never ever pay it back. Apparently they somehow paid off their debt to be by misstake, apparetly an automated payment that they had somehow forgotten to cancel. (guess I'm blessed with luck) The first thing I had to say about that was, "people would call me stupid if I did that." I mean, seriously! They had been a thorn/pain(although relatively minor and insignificant) in my side for a long time, I'm glad they are moving out of my life now. Nm all those psychopaths and all other people pouring gasoline on anything resembling a world peace atempt for their own gain. Worldpeace seems somewhat unlikely don't you think? there will still be corners of the world that will be able to stay relatively peaceful for long amounts of time, but world peace.... doesn't seem likely. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Metis Posted December 9, 2016 Report Share Posted December 9, 2016 Oh, it's entirely possible. Just at a higher cost than most are willing to pay. And yes, definitely looking forwards to that update . Assuming I haven't died of old age by that point, of course . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Albert Posted December 10, 2016 Report Share Posted December 10, 2016 Oh, it's entirely possible. Just at a higher cost than most are willing to pay. And yes, definitely looking forwards to that update . Assuming I haven't died of old age by that point, of course . Maybe if everyone get an implant that prevents them from acting poorly... Kind of a tech version of a wellintended but incredibly invasive Mastery... Kind of Mastery intended to do good. Act within acceptable parameters and nothing happens, try to do something that's not on the "OK" list and it asserts itself. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
freespace2dotcom Posted December 10, 2016 Report Share Posted December 10, 2016 Honestly, I would be leery of leery of anyone attempting world peace. Odds are there would be some angle to screw people over. There are only two ways to bring people together; one is persuasion, and the other is force. If you use force, you are not fit to be called a peacemaker. If you use persuasion, then you'd have to have a way that benefits everyone. Given the various ways of thinking, it is all but impossible to do that. Segregation is not a bad thing so long as there isn't force. If everyone is allowed to make their own choices, while being respectful of other's abilities to do the same, that is liberty, and the only way to achieve true peace. Sadly that very simple ideal is all but extinct on a national level. You'll never get peace the way most leaders act. Maybe if everyone get an implant that prevents them from acting poorly... Kind of a tech version of a wellintended but incredibly invasive Mastery... Kind of Mastery intended to do good. Act within acceptable parameters and nothing happens, try to do something that's not on the "OK" list and it asserts itself. They'd have to kill me first. What the world deems 'ok' is not my values. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Albert Posted December 10, 2016 Report Share Posted December 10, 2016 Honestly, I would be leery of leery of anyone attempting world peace. Odds are there would be some angle to screw people over. There are only two ways to bring people together; one is persuasion, and the other is force. If you use force, you are not fit to be called a peacemaker. If you use persuasion, then you'd have to have a way that benefits everyone. Given the various ways of thinking, it is all but impossible to do that. Segregation is not a bad thing so long as there isn't force. If everyone is allowed to make their own choices, while being respectful of other's abilities to do the same, that is liberty, and the only way to achieve true peace. Sadly that very simple ideal is all but extinct on a national level. You'll never get peace the way most leaders act. They'd have to kill me first. What the world deems 'ok' is not my values. I wouldn't expect a lot of people to be ok with that tbh, but it would probably efficient as long as it worked as intended. It would be a kind of world peace, that doesn't mean everyone is happy about it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
freespace2dotcom Posted December 10, 2016 Report Share Posted December 10, 2016 If everyone is not happy with it... Is it even worth having? My answer of course, is no. Besides, a device that could force people to not think about God, for example, because supposedly that 'encourages religious extremism' goes right up to and even beyond what was written in 1984, for example. And if God does exist, then you can bet that a system like that goes against everything He stands for. It would be fulfillment of biblical prophecy about there being a great falling away, too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Albert Posted December 10, 2016 Report Share Posted December 10, 2016 If everyone is not happy with it... Is it even worth having? My answer of course, is no. Besides, a device that could force people to not think about God, for example, because supposedly that 'encourages religious extremism' goes right up to and even beyond what was written in 1984, for example. And if God does exist, then you can bet that a system like that goes against everything He stands for. It would be fulfillment of biblical prophecy about there being a great falling away, too. It's not certain people actually get to choose when the date commes to hit the switch. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
freespace2dotcom Posted December 10, 2016 Report Share Posted December 10, 2016 ...What? Edit, Ok, I understand you, but People always have a choice to say up yours. It just requires you to put your life on the line. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Albert Posted December 10, 2016 Report Share Posted December 10, 2016 ...What? Edit, Ok, I understand you, but People always have a choice to say up yours. It just requires you to put your life on the line. Let's say the nanites that installs the neuralcontrol is the foodsupply and medicine, and people don't know about it, and certainly don't know about it's possible added functions and applications. Then when you reach a full or at least high enough puplation saturation the people behidn the idea just flips a switch and their version of world peace has arrived. No heroics, no resistance, no chacne to say up your, you can't even take your own life, all you can do is apply for a dangerous job or take up the most dangerous hobby allowed if you want to push it and take your life... A world where you're free as long as you don't feel like causing trouble or happen to dissagree with the general consensus of what's right and wrong. A world where the only concern is peace and safety and the general wellbeing of the whole. If they cared about makign peopel happy aswell they could pair it with artificialy stimulated happiness and contentment.... Either through direct stimuli to the neurosystem or soemthing like "Joy" in "We happy few" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Schwarzbart Posted December 11, 2016 Report Share Posted December 11, 2016 In my opinion the first thing that have to be sacrificed to gain world peace is the capitalism as we have it now and make sure each and every human have more covered then just the basic needs. To large differences in ownership are nearly always reason for conflicts especial when on one side there people who not even know how to get the next meal, water that is save to drink or even air that is save to breath and on the other side people that burn food just to move 2000kg heavy vehicle to get 1 person from A to B or even pure enjoinment. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
freespace2dotcom Posted December 11, 2016 Report Share Posted December 11, 2016 Heh. I personally believe that the world will end before we get to that point, Albert. There may be folks who want it that way, but I suspect that the system will be designed to trick the vast majority into accepting it, thereby removing most of the risk in doing it. And as for wealth redistribution, I will point out that taking wealth from folks and giving it to others tends to backfire. I think a good example of this is what happened in Zimbabwe some time ago. Under the guise of giving from the rich to the poor, a lot of land and machinery was taken and redistributed for free to folks who neither had the training nor inclination to use it properly. Exports sharply dropped to almost nothing, and all of a sudden the government decided to print money to make up the shortfall in the lack of taxes. Then everyone went broke or left the country if they could. Even in America, there are a *lot* of poor people relying on socialist handouts because it just isn't worth it to do any kind of economic activity. Why bust your butt making minimum wage when if you don't work it qualifies you for free EBT benefits? I'm not saying that charity is bad, I think people should give freely of their own accord if they think it is proper. All that is really needed to increase real wealth is to keep goverment regulations as low as possible. That allows people to compete with large corporations which is their anathema, as JD Rockefeller pointedly stated it's a sin for them to do that. If a person has wealth it is their prerogative on how to use it. If you take that away then all you really do is make everyone equally destitute eventually. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Albert Posted December 11, 2016 Report Share Posted December 11, 2016 In my opinion the first thing that have to be sacrificed to gain world peace is the capitalism as we have it now and make sure each and every human have more covered then just the basic needs. To large differences in ownership are nearly always reason for conflicts especial when on one side there people who not even know how to get the next meal, water that is save to drink or even air that is save to breath and on the other side people that burn food just to move 2000kg heavy vehicle to get 1 person from A to B or even pure enjoinment. I see, well, that would probably requier even more micromanagement of the individual. On a more serious note, like you said, there are a lot of people who don't even know how to get the next meal, a lot of help programs focus on giving people a fish when they need learn how to fish, or do something else that will result in them produsing/earning their own meal. Often, the poorer the people the more children they get and the harder it becommes for them to get the schooling, and the support needed from parents and their society to find their way into becomming productive family members and citizens. There are several Asian countries where they have started managing their birthrates and started focusing on educating and creating a better future for the fewer children they get and thereby they also help create a more sustainable future in both their region but also the whole world. Better to help people stand on their own two legs rather than carrying them for their whole lives, teach them how to earn that needed income and food, how to maintain fiscal responsibility and sustainability(A lot of people all over the world still needs to learn that last part). I'm hoping electric vehicles or in some cases hybrid will provide more sustainable solutions for transportation. Less polutions.. Yet there will always come a point where there are more peopel than any kind of system can manage, then people will start dying, one way or another. The least horrid future would probably result from birtcontrol... Rather than wars, desperate people killing killing each other for a piece of bread, starvation diseases and systematic cleansings of those who you don't think are your closest relatives or productive enough or supportive enough, with other people doing the same or similar. I think this is getting too political... But yes, the future will have issues and there will always be people who think they are the ones to decide what's right for everyone, and everyone else has to bow to them and their will. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Schwarzbart Posted December 11, 2016 Report Share Posted December 11, 2016 And as for wealth redistribution, I will point out that taking wealth from folks and giving it to others tends to backfire. I think a good example of this is what happened in Zimbabwe some time ago. Under the guise of giving from the rich to the poor, a lot of land and machinery was taken and redistributed for free to folks who neither had the training nor inclination to use it properly. Exports sharply dropped to almost nothing, and all of a sudden the government decided to print money to make up the shortfall in the lack of taxes. Then everyone went broke or left the country if they could. Even in America, there are a *lot* of poor people relying on socialist handouts because it just isn't worth it to do any kind of economic activity. Why bust your butt making minimum wage when if you don't work it qualifies you for free EBT benefits? I'm not saying that charity is bad, I think people should give freely of their own accord if they think it is proper. All that is really needed to increase real wealth is to keep goverment regulations as low as possible. That allows people to compete with large corporations which is their anathema, as JD Rockefeller pointedly stated it's a sin for them to do that. If a person has wealth it is their prerogative on how to use it. If you take that away then all you really do is make everyone equally destitute eventually. I know about this problem but the other side is that the USA, China, the EU and other countries active rob weaker countries of their resources without pay any reasonable price. Just look where the big fish catching ships of the bigger countries go for catching their fish its usual near the border of other countries and not in their own backyard because there the resources already to small to get a good revenue. Do you really think it help teaching people fishing if at the same breath the same country send out big industry ships to catch all fish away? Or to teach people how to rise chicken just to pay money to farmer of the rich country that they send chicken parts below the cost of produce them to the country where the people just got educated how to raise their own chicken? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Albert Posted December 11, 2016 Report Share Posted December 11, 2016 I know about this problem but the other side is that the USA, China, the EU and other countries active rob weaker countries of their resources without pay any reasonable price. Just look where the big fish catching ships of the bigger countries go for catching their fish its usual near the border of other countries and not in their own backyard because there the resources already to small to get a good revenue. Do you really think it help teaching people fishing if at the same breath the same country send out big industry ships to catch all fish away? Or to teach people how to rise chicken just to pay money to farmer of the rich country that they send chicken parts below the cost of produce them to the country where the people just got educated how to raise their own chicken? The French loves farming subsidies, it's a cultural thing, and with the British leaving the EU it will only get worse on that front. As a Swedish tax payer I find it crazy that there should be subsidies on french or polish or even Swedish farming handled by the EU.. The French already got national farming subsidies as I understand it, I have no idea why it's such a holy cow to them to have it subsidized with EU taxpayer money. Also, I'm very much pro freemarket and agaisnt subsidies in most cases. In some cases there might be poor regions that might need some support etz, especially after dissasters or other problems that's affected a region. As for resources and what people pay for them, people rarely pay more than they have to for anything unless it's for charity or to support something. It's usualy a supply and demand, and a resource that's got more supply than demend tends to have a dropping market value. Often poor countries try to produce easy to produce every day items and resources, however when a lot of people produce the same products and resources the market gets flooded and the value drops. It hasn't been a problem exclusive to the poor countries but it might hit those people harder if they got less of a buffer and a low diversity economy where a lot of people are dependant on that industry. A lot of European countries used to have their own textile manufacture and basic goods production, the factoryworker jobs, that are becomming less and less common in europe and other parts of the developed world. A lot of people who lacked the education for other jobs got unemployed, lost their jobs, had a hard time finding new ones, a lot of those still make it though the day due to government wellfareprograms or some kind of government funded social safety net that provides for them usualy at the existance minimum whatever that happens to be in each of these countries. It does however affect the overall economy with higher taxes and lower income and reduced market competitiveness. On the otherhand several very poor countries got an economic boost, most prominently China, who took up huge marketshares or highworkintensive low education jobs and market segments. Segments that a lot of poor countries all over the world is trying to enter. All pushing, and oversaturating the markets with cheap nicknacks and basic every day consumer products and items. Disscontentment can be seen all over the world, even in the parts that are still holding on to their relatively strong economies that are just slightly singed and feeling the pressure. You can see malcontent and dissatisfied people all over, even in the so called rich countries where it expressed in phenomena like Trump and Brexit etz. I'm sure there is a lot of peopel in the poor countries who think the people in the socalled rich part of the world should be happy but do you think the people who voted for Brexit or Trump were happy? In theory a freemarket leads to people moving from oversaturated markets into areas where they can find a job, where there is a need for their product or service. Also, people should be more prepared to try soemthing new rather than the old and wellknown ways of making a living. If there are too many people offering chicken or fishing fish, figure out whatever else it is that people still need more off that you can provide. Don't line up to be the tenth shopolishing guy where there is only one customer visiting the market each day. Life has never been easy in the past, why should it be that much easier now? What might cause more worry is the fact that the world poulation has increased from 1.5 to 7.5 Billion from 1900-2016... That certainly leaves for less wealth to go around and less livingspace for wildanimals and oxygenproducing forests and resource recovery. a population that's been multiplied by 5 in roughly a century. We currently got a mass extinction event going on in the animal kingdom so to speak. Deserts spreading out... etz etz.. In the future we might have to worry more about a massextinctionevent involving humans rather than who has the most toothpicks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
freespace2dotcom Posted December 11, 2016 Report Share Posted December 11, 2016 Yeah, probably getting a little too political. At least we haven't been killing each other yet. Legate, whats the story on DLC17? If you don't get it out this year, a flame war will be the least of your worries! lol. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Legate of Mineta Posted December 11, 2016 Author Report Share Posted December 11, 2016 Oh no, this is great reading. When it's ready. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ascartand Posted December 11, 2016 Report Share Posted December 11, 2016 so SoonTM Well I can't wait for DLC 17. Hopefully it has some good adventures in store. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
freespace2dotcom Posted December 11, 2016 Report Share Posted December 11, 2016 Oh no, this is great reading. Fu, Talk about end of the world, mind enslavement, and why everything's so screwed up.. I just can't shake this feeling that somewhere the team is taking notes on this.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Metis Posted December 11, 2016 Report Share Posted December 11, 2016 They'd be better off taking notes from Nocturne. Limiting that topic to the confines of reality only makes it boring. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
freespace2dotcom Posted December 12, 2016 Report Share Posted December 12, 2016 I assume you mean the SMT game? I always wanted to try it, but it was a hard game to get even when I had lots of money to burn and Gamestop was still selling PS2 stuff. Now I suppose the only certain way to get it is ebay, but right now I have a lot of things on my -to buy list. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Metis Posted December 12, 2016 Report Share Posted December 12, 2016 Indeed. I'd suggest a more recent alternative, but given that I all but gave up on modern gaming back around the time when consoles doing 720p was considered cutting edge you can probably imagine why I've got nothing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
freespace2dotcom Posted December 12, 2016 Report Share Posted December 12, 2016 With a few exceptions, I'm mostly the same way. I'm getting into Eve online again, of all things, now that you can sort of play f2p. It's limited, but I haven't had a need to brush past the limit yet. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Metis Posted December 12, 2016 Report Share Posted December 12, 2016 I imagine that limit is going to show up sooner or later, so if you want to spare yourself from the inevitable temptation you might as well cut your losses before you lose anything. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
freespace2dotcom Posted December 12, 2016 Report Share Posted December 12, 2016 ...But I must... Go to nullsec... And become the universe's... Leading industrialist! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jarod Cain Posted December 13, 2016 Report Share Posted December 13, 2016 . . . Ok, guess I'll keep coming back every few days and checking if things are out yet or not. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.