Live data from Hacker News

Peopleless economy? Not technically impossible

gmalandrakis.com

511–520 of 613 posts

Re: Peopleless economy? Not technically impossible

#511
post #505
post #489

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But a lower probability than ever before in human history of those things

Climate change would like a word.

If you think that you're simply incorrect. For the average person in a Western country, life is dramatically better anytime in the next hundred years, including the worst possible outcomes of climate change. Not to mention that the exponential growth of solar panels is basically stabilized in climate right now.

Re: Peopleless economy? Not technically impossible

#512

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A need does not get filled simply because it exists. If society is no longer necessary and participating within the economy then society can't provide a safety net for kids. It's like walking in the desert assuming you will reach water soon because you are really thirsty. Nature doesn't care about human needs and will allow you to die of thirst.

But does human nature allow one member of the caravan having (a lot of) water, while everyone else goes thirsty?

yes? why is that even a question.

you have enough money to buy a phone and spare time to comment, just like me, while people die of hunger and thirst in Sudan: 50 dollars would buy life saving medicines and water treatment. but i spent it on a Spotify subscription and some weed.

also, i stepped over a homeless guy on my way into the grocery store last week.

Re: Peopleless economy? Not technically impossible

#513
post #508
post #503

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Unless expropriation happens the rich can’t simply take over land. They still have to buy it. Ted Turner, Bill Gates still had to buy land from individuals. So unless people sell all their land to these people, there will still be land.

First, let me clarify my dystopian scenario is extreme. I'm aware of this, and I'm not saying it will necessarily come to pass. (edit: removed a wall of text that was repeating my previous comment). What I describe can start gradually, like arguably it may be already happening, and pick up speed after a certain tipping point. After enough automation + concentration of power and wealth has been achieved, then the mask…

In the USSR, Cuba, China, etc., where expropriation or nationalization happened, first they confiscated everyone’s firearms. That’s always step one to take rights or property from people.

I know the 2A is both contentious and leads to problems (like violence), but it also gives pause and prevents overzealous or corrupt governments or individuals from going too far. Yes there was ruby ridge and Waco and Kent state and others but still the government has to think hard before it goes further encroaching on liberties. All those examples are tragedies; however in a society with oppression not only would that be routine but they’d be hidden or accepted as fate of counter revolutionaries.

Re: Peopleless economy? Not technically impossible

#514

It is frustrating to not be able to predict the future. How can you get married, have children, get a 25 year mortgage on a house, buy a car for comfort even though you don't absolutely need it? Even if you do consider buying a home, how do you know it's worth anything if you can't predict this particular place's future situation? Some countries tax enough to make the risk of buying quite high. A leap of faith is req…

No one could ever predict anything and we're all going to die.

Re: Peopleless economy? Not technically impossible

#515
post #323

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Piketty is just a marxist flailing around, backfilling data to fit his belief that communism is the solution for every problem. He's been spectacularly wrong in his predictions so far, for example he said Milei would be "devastating" for Argentina and the opposite is the case.

I'm pretty sure no Marxist considers Piketty a fellow Marxist, he's much closer to social democracy and Keynes. Piketty advocates for market economy and a global capital tax, Marxists on the other hand advocate for the violent overthrowing of capitalism and collective ownership of the means of production. Can you spot the difference?

Piketty is not a marxist, he even declared he never read Das Capital.

Re: Peopleless economy? Not technically impossible

#516
post #399

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, predicting the future was never possible. In fact, for most of the time in human history, the future looked incredibly bleak. Yet I am immensely grateful that my ancestors chose to build homes and marry and have children and live life through the great plague, through middle ages in which most of the population expected the apocalypse to be just around the corner, the 30 years war with up to 70% of the populatio…

> Yes, predicting the future was never possible. True, but... > In fact, for most of the time in human history, the future looked incredibly bleak. No, the rate of change was slow enough that you could probably make a good-enough prediction: your life would be similar to that of your father's or grandfathers'. The problem is that nowadays, some foolish technology-worshiping assholes have pushed the rate of change fas…

You might like this -

Future Shock (1972)

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=fkUwXenBokU&pp=ygUMZnV0dXJlIHN...

Re: Peopleless economy? Not technically impossible

#517

It is frustrating to not be able to predict the future. How can you get married, have children, get a 25 year mortgage on a house, buy a car for comfort even though you don't absolutely need it? Even if you do consider buying a home, how do you know it's worth anything if you can't predict this particular place's future situation? Some countries tax enough to make the risk of buying quite high. A leap of faith is req…

They make it impossible to predict on purpose. The more the population is disoriented the better for the ultra rich, paradoxically it maximizes control. It is a hostile act of course, but as always they're at war with you but you are not at war with them. Choose offline communities, organize, organize, organize. Peacefully, constructively, remember a coordinated general strike is much more dangerous to them than your…

It's the ultra rich's domestication program. It is after all how they got control away from the previous civilization scale domesticators/farmers, the monarchies.

Re: Peopleless economy? Not technically impossible

#518
No. There is this fantasy that AI will take over and be our nanny, doling out the perfect communist bread, this time without having to wait in line!

Fortunately, that is nonsense for many reasons, but 3 important ones are: the nature of AI, the nature of humans, evolutionary biology and the international cooperation required to optimize the sharing of resources without humane stakeholders making the decisions.

So, sorry if you're of the Marxist, post-scarcity ultimate equality persuasion. It just so happens that you'll never get the entire world to want to become an amorphous gelatinous blob where all the infrastructural, interpersonal, resource distribution and many other decisions are all handled by robots so you never need to learn or do anything about how it all works.

Re: Peopleless economy? Not technically impossible

#519
post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Oh my god I can just FEEL the growth! It's going to trickle down any second now! Any second!

How about this trend? https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/world-population-in-extre... There is growth, it might not be where you are, or it might be superimposed with other effects for you.

That graph ends in 2015. The 2025 graph flattens. Looks like we can explain this trend by the economic development of East Asia.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Total_population_living_i...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Extreme_poverty

Post reply on HN