Difference between revisions of "Talk:Post-scarcity"
| Line 13: | Line 13: | ||
==End of commercial era== | ==End of commercial era== | ||
| + | Ultimately how will companies be able to compete with huge open-source networks? Can restricted groups of professionals outcompete the rest of the world (that also include so-called professionals) who are constantly evolving shared IP. When the tools have matured and working practices for thistype of collaboration have been highly optimised, it seems rather unlikely... | ||
==John Gelles note== | ==John Gelles note== | ||
Revision as of 00:56, 16 March 2007
| This 'discussion page' is currently used to hold notes for the development of this website (however it can still be used for discussion) |
|---|
Need section on population growth. See michael email
Interesting article on population growth: http://news.mongabay.com/2005/0502-rhett_butler.html
Point that once people get beyond materialism people are then in an optimal position to co-operate and collaborate for the right reasons.
Section on the economics of abundance.
Note about these developments not happening in a political and social vacuum - I'm just describing what is technologically possible at the moment.
The simplest analogy is that of a vast jungle providing fruit in abundance for anyone to eat – but in this scenario the jungle is highly autonomous distributed machinery that has been transparently and collaboratively designed.
End of commercial era
Ultimately how will companies be able to compete with huge open-source networks? Can restricted groups of professionals outcompete the rest of the world (that also include so-called professionals) who are constantly evolving shared IP. When the tools have matured and working practices for thistype of collaboration have been highly optimised, it seems rather unlikely...
John Gelles note
The fundamental positive (a sufficiency of material, energy, intelligence, information) is matched by the fundamental negatives: the urge to populate until scarcity trumps abundance (Malthusian doctrine); and the urge develop complexity, variation, embellishment and clutter, until intelligence cannot cope -- that is to experience the triumph of form over substance or mandarinism).
Simple solutions are resisted by the force of habit: for example, we do not highly reward females who limit themselves to two children, nor do we sufficiently reward effective simplification (an art that to date has lost the war against counter-productive complexity, clutter and distraction.)
Existing economics is defined by scarcity. Existing law is defined by blessed complexity.
Money, the God-sent simplifier, is under the control of the Devil. Rescue it, and the path to an advanced civilization will be widened to vastly increase the speed of travel to its many locales.
http://wiki-debate.wikispaces.com/debating+the+money+question
-- Johngelles 22:29, 22 February 2007
Image
Make image of cornucopia with more relevant stuff pouring out:
- Medicine
- Drinking water
- Food
- Vehicles
- Machines
- Housing
- Consumer products
- etc
General
- Create pages for people like Fresco
