Difference between revisions of "AdCiv talk:About"
From AdCiv
(→Content guidelines) |
|||
| (4 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
==Content guidelines== | ==Content guidelines== | ||
One question that needs to be clarified is this: Is AdCiv about what will be possible in the near future or is it about what is possible now? As it stands, it is really about both. Articles (like [[Virtual designs into physical objects]], [[Medicine]] etc.) should make both clear: that we can do ABC now, and in 20 years we expect to be able to do XYZ as well. --Balatro | One question that needs to be clarified is this: Is AdCiv about what will be possible in the near future or is it about what is possible now? As it stands, it is really about both. Articles (like [[Virtual designs into physical objects]], [[Medicine]] etc.) should make both clear: that we can do ABC now, and in 20 years we expect to be able to do XYZ as well. --Balatro | ||
| − | : Yes, | + | : Yes, AdCiv is about both equally, as it's ultimately about the transition from the current scarcity-oriented society to a post-scarcity society {{en}} exploring concepts (both existing and emerging) that are based on reasonably well understood science, engineering, logic and social factors. A key thread for AdCiv is that a post-scarcity society is possible with know-how we already possess, and there are obvious advancements to come based on those things we can do already. |
| + | :It's not so much simply documenting all emerging 'interesting ideas' but painting a particular picture of what we should/could be working towards for the benefit the global population, with supporting examples. I don't think we need to necessarily put time-scales on future tech (not that is possible anyway), but just to describe it as an emerging possibility. | ||
| − | : | + | : For most things we can already point at existing early implementations or research. Post-scarcity is a fairly radical idea to most people, so the intention for AdCiv is illustrate near-future possibilities that are understandable and believable, that help focus people's efforts to work towards this kind of world {{en}} and doesn't seem too far out of reach. |
| − | : | + | : Do ask for elaboration if that doesn't adequately answer your question! --[[User:CharlesC|CharlesC]] 15:56, 27 June 2010 (CEST) |
Latest revision as of 16:17, 27 June 2010
Content guidelines
One question that needs to be clarified is this: Is AdCiv about what will be possible in the near future or is it about what is possible now? As it stands, it is really about both. Articles (like Virtual designs into physical objects, Medicine etc.) should make both clear: that we can do ABC now, and in 20 years we expect to be able to do XYZ as well. --Balatro
- Yes, AdCiv is about both equally, as it's ultimately about the transition from the current scarcity-oriented society to a post-scarcity society – exploring concepts (both existing and emerging) that are based on reasonably well understood science, engineering, logic and social factors. A key thread for AdCiv is that a post-scarcity society is possible with know-how we already possess, and there are obvious advancements to come based on those things we can do already.
- It's not so much simply documenting all emerging 'interesting ideas' but painting a particular picture of what we should/could be working towards for the benefit the global population, with supporting examples. I don't think we need to necessarily put time-scales on future tech (not that is possible anyway), but just to describe it as an emerging possibility.
- For most things we can already point at existing early implementations or research. Post-scarcity is a fairly radical idea to most people, so the intention for AdCiv is illustrate near-future possibilities that are understandable and believable, that help focus people's efforts to work towards this kind of world – and doesn't seem too far out of reach.
- Do ask for elaboration if that doesn't adequately answer your question! --CharlesC 15:56, 27 June 2010 (CEST)
